BS  2415  .S443 

^185l"^'''  ^^^^i^-"  Christ, 

The  supreme  revelation 


THE    SUPREME  REVELATION 


V 


0^  ''  ^''^m^ 


TEE  ^WANDER  LECTURED  1913 


MAY   6  1915 


^,,. 


\r  ii 


tcv»V 


THE  SUPREM 
REVELATION 


STUDIES    IN    THE    SYNOPTIC 
TEACHING   OF   JESUS 


BY 


WILLIAM    C.    SCHAEFFER,    Ph.D.,    D.D. 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Science  in  the  Theological 
Seminary  of  the  Reformed  Church,  Lancaster,  Pa. 


New  York  Chicago  Toronto 

Fleming  H.    Revell    Company 

London  and  Edinburgh 


Copyright,  1914,  by 
FLEMING  H.  REVELL  COMPANY 


New  York:  158  Fifth  Avenue 
Chicago:  125  N.  Wabash  Ave. 
Toronto:  25  Richmond  St.,  W. 
London:  21  Paternoster  Square 
Edinburgh:   100   Princes   Street 


PREFACE 

How  may  we  know  God  ?  That  has  been  the  age- 
long cry  of  humanity,  as  deep  and  as  wide  as  human 
aspiration.  God  has  answered  the  cry  in  many  ways, 
in  nature  and  history,  by  prophet  and  seer.  Every 
religion,  professed  among  men,  has  had  some  response 
to  this  universal  longing.  "  The  heavens  declare  the 
glory  of  God ;  and  the  firmament  showeth  his  handi- 
work. Day  unto  day  uttereth  speech,  and  night  unto 
night  showeth  knowledge."  Wise  men  of  every  age 
and  clime  have  been  listening  to  that  divine  voice; 
and  they  have  interpreted  that  utterance,  as  best  they 
could,  to  the  men  of  their  own  time.  God  has  also 
spoken  in  history.  "  He  made  known  his  ways  unto 
Moses,  his  doings  unto  the  children  of  Israel."  So 
with  every  subsequent  prophet  and  seer.  And  so  it 
has  come  to  pass  that  there  has  been  a  progressive 
revelation  of  God  throughout  the  ages.  Last  of  all 
God  has  spoken  to  us  through  his  Son.  He,  and  he 
only,  has  known  the  Father  perfectly;  he,  and  he 
only,  has  been  able  to  reveal  him  fully.  Hence  in  him 
— ^in  his  life,  in  his  work,  and  in  his  teaching — do 
we  have  the  supreme  revelation. 

Is  there  room  for  another  book  on  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  ?    The  best  minds  of  the  Church  in  all  ages  have 

5 


6  PREFACE 

been  employed  with  the  study  of  that  teaching ;  and  it 
might  seem  as  if  another  interpretation  could  scarcely 
be  in  order.  But  as  long  as  our  finite  minds  have  not 
comprehended  the  infinite,  so  long  will  there  remain 
aspects  of  that  glory  to  be  caught  and  reflected  by  new 
study.  As  the  great  ocean  is  ever  casting  up  on  the 
shore  new  forms  of  beauty,  so  is  the  supreme  revela- 
tion of  Jesus  ever  giving  up  new  treasures  to  every 
devout  inquiry;  and  as  any  child  may  find  a  pearl 
upon  the  shore,  so  may  every  honest  inquirer 
perchance  find  some  new  truth  in  the  teaching  of  our 
Lord. 

The  following  chapters  contain  the  substance  of  a 
course  of  lectures  on  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  delivered 
for  several  years  to  the  Junior  class  in  The  Theo- 
logical Seminary  of  the  Reformed  Church  in  the 
United  States,  at  Lancaster,  Pa.  In  1913  the  Faculty 
kindly  designated  them  as  the  Swander  lectures  for 
that  year.  In  accordance  with  the  requirements  of 
that  foundation,  they  are  now  given  to  the  Church 
in  book  form,  in  the  hope  that  they  may  find  a  larger 
sphere  of  usefulness,  and  with  the  assurance  that  the 
members  of  the  Church  will  be  glad  to  know,  in  part 
at  least,  what  is  being  taught  in  their  school  of  the 
prophets. 


EOU:N'DATIOiT  OF  THE  SWA:N'DER 
LECTUKESHIP 

The  Swander  Lectureship  in  the  Theological  Semi- 
nary of  the  Keformed  Church  in  the  United  States, 
located  at  Lancaster,  Pa.,  was  founded  by  the  Eeve- 
rend  John  I.  Swander,  D.D.,  and  his  wife,  Barbara 
Kimmell  Swander,  for  the  twofold  purpose  of  promul- 
gating sound  Christological  science,  and  of  erecting  a 
memorial  to  their  daughter,  Sarah  Ellen  Swander, 
born  April  30th,  1862,  died  September  29th,  1879; 
and  to  their  son,  ISTevin  Ambrose  Swander,  born 
August  7th,  1863,  died  March  29th,  1884.  It  shall 
be  known  as  the  "  Sarah  Ellen  and  ^N'evin  Ambrose 
Swander  Lectureship."  Eor  its  maintenance  a  sum  of 
money  was  given  to  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  the  said 
Theological  Seminary,  the  interest  of  which  is  to  be 
applied  for  the  publication  of  lectures  in  book  form, 
in  accordance  with  the  conditions  defined  by  the  terms 
which  accompanied  the  conveyance  of  the  fund  into 
the  hands  of  the  aforenamed  Board  of  Trustees. 

These  lectures  are  delivered  by  members  of  the 
Faculty  of  the  Theological  Seminary,  and  others 
whom  the  Faculty  may  select  and  secure  for  such 
service ;  and  while  the  said  Faculty  shall  guard  dili- 
gently against  the  admission  of  anything  into  these 
memorial  volumes  at  variance  with  the  truth  as  it  is 
in  Jesus,  they  shall  not  be  held  responsible  for  the 
views  of  the  individual  lecturers. 

7 


CONTENTS 

I 
Introduction 15 

1.  The  Influence  of  Jesus. 

2.  The  Influence  of  Jesus  that  of  a  Teacher. 

3.  The  Supreme  Revelation. 

4.  Present  Day  Appeals  to  the  Teaching  of  Jesus. 

5.  The  Problem. 

II 

Our  Sources  of  Information 35 

1.  The  Oral  Gospel. 

2.  The  Gospel  According  to  Mark. 

3.  The  Q  Source. 

4.  Other  Sources. 

5.  The  Personal  Equation. 

6.  The  Ipsissima  Verba  of  Jesus. 

7.  The  Doubly  Attested  Sayings  of  Jesus. 


Ill 

Jesus  and  the  Old  Testament 61 

1.  His  Use  of  the  Old  Testament. 

2.  His  Estimate  of  Its  Value. 

3.  His  Sympathy  with  the  Prophetic  Ideal. 

9 


10  CONTENTS 

4.  His  Conscious  Superiority. 

5.  How  He  Fulfilled  the  Law  and  the  Prophets. 

6.  His  Relation  to  Contemporary  Jewish  Thought. 


IV 

The  Conception  op  God 85 

1.  Names  Used  by  Jesus  to  Designate  God. 

2.  What  Meaning  Jesus  Put  into  the  Name. 

3.  The  Extent  of  God's  Fatherhood. 

4.  The  Attitude  of  the  Father's  Love  Toward  Sin. 

5.  God's  Presence. 

6.  The  Originality  of  Jesus'  Conception. 

V 

The  Estimate  op  Man 112 

1.  The  Inestimable  Value  of  Human  Life. 

2.  Evil  and  Lost. 

3.  The  Depth  of  the  Depravity. 

4.  Despairing  of  No  Man. 

5.  Sons  of  God. 

VI 

The  Kingdom  op  God i.    136 

1.  The  Old  Testament  Basis. 

2.  The  Name. 

3.  The  Meaning. 

1)  A  Divine  Rule. 

2)  A  Celestial  Realm. 

3)  A  Spiritual  Common  wealth. 


CONTENTS  11 

4.  The  Nature  of  the  Kingdom. 

1)  A  Gift. 

2)  A  Task. 

5.  The  Kingdom  as  a  Present  Possession. 

6.  The  Kingdom  as  a  Blessed  Hope. 


VII 

The  Founder  of  the  Kingdom 164 

1.  His  Filial  Consciousness. 

How  Brought  to  Our  Attention. 

1)  By  the  Use  of  the  Title  Son. 

2)  By  the  Use  of  the  Name  Father. 

3)  By  the  Use  of  "  My  Father." 

"What  is  Implied  in  the  Filial  Consciousness. 

1)  A  Unique  Knowledge  of  God. 

2)  Perfect  Obedience. 

3)  Unique  Sonship. 

2.  The  Messianic  Consciousness. 

1)  Appears  in  His  Consciousness  of  a  Mission. 

2)  In  His  Consciousness  of  Being  the  Saviour. 

3)  Further  in  His  Founding  of  the  Church. 

3.  The  Lordship  of  Jesus. 

VIII 
The  Founding  of  the  Kingdom 189 

1.  Correcting  Misapprehensions. 

2.  Forgiving  Sin. 

3.  His  Holy  Life. 

4.  His  Sacrificial  Death. 

5.  Establishing  the  Church. 


12  CONTENTS 

IX 

The  Citizens  of  the  Kingdom 215 

1.  That  Which  Constitutes  the  Citizen  Is  Character. 

2.  What  This  Character  Is. 

3.  Entering  the  Kingdom. 

1)  Kepentance. 

2)  Faith. 

4.  True  Blessedness. 

5.  The  Citizen  of  the  Kingdom  in  Relation  to  the 

World. 

X 
The  Life  of  the  Kingdom 239 

1.  The  True  Righteousness. 

1)  Continuity  between  the  Old  and  the  New. 

2)  The  Old  Superseded  by  the  New. 

2.  The  True  Religion. 

1)  Almsgiving. 

2)  Prayer. 

3)  Fasting. 

3.  The  Pure  Morality. 

1)  The  Relation  of  Man  to  His  Fellow-men. 

2)  The  Relation  of  Man  to  the  Family. 

3)  The  Relation  of  Man  to  the  State. 

XI 

The  Development  of  the  Kingdom  ....       266 

1.  The  Kingdom  Subject  to  the  Law  of  Growth. 

2.  Development  through  Crises. 

3.  The  Propagation  of  the  Kingdom. 

1)  The  Preaching  of  the  Word. 

2)  Holy  Baptism. 

3)  The  Lord's  Supper. 


CONTENTS  13 

XII 

The  Consummation  of  the  Kingdom    ....  290 

1.  The  State  of  the  Christian  Dead. 

2.  The  Resurrection. 

3.  The  Second  Coming. 

4.  The  Final  Judgment. 

5.  The  Consummation. 


IN^TEODUCTIOK 
1.     The  Influence  of  Jesus 

NO  one  has  ever  exerted  an  influence  on  tlie 
history  of  mankind,  which  can  for  a  moment 
be  compared  with  that  of  Jesus  of  N"azareth. 
The  humble  carpenter  of  an  obscure  village,  in  an 
insignificant  province  of  the  Roman  empire,  he  has 
yet  been  a  more  potent  factor  in  shaping  the  course 
of  history,  and  in  moulding  the  destinies  of  mankind 
than  all  the  statesmen  and  generals,  the  sages  and 
philosophers  of  that  once  proud  and  mighty  empire. 
His  life  was  short,  and  his  public  career  among 
the  briefest.  At  the  age  of  about  thirty,  he  left  the 
obscurity  of  his  workshop.  He  spent  a  few  years 
in  a  ministry  of  kindly  benefaction,  mostly  among 
the  humbler  classes  of  his  native  land.  He  delivered 
his  God-given  message.  Then,  because  he  had  ex- 
cited the  jealous  hatred  of  the  great  and  powerful, 
he  died  the  shameful  death  of  the  cross.  But  at 
the  moment,  when  his  enemies  thought  that  he  had 
been  crushed,  he  began  to  live  in  a  new  form  in  the 
faith  and  in  the  hearts  of  his  followers;  and  by 
the  very  shame  of  his  cross  he  attained  a  crown  of 

15 


16  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

glory,  which  has  been  shining  with  increasing  bright- 
ness throughout  the  ages  since. 

The  impression  which  Jesus  made  upon  the  men 
of  his  own  generation  was  most  profound.  This 
may  be  seen  in  the  attitude  both  of  his  enemies  and 
of  his  friends.  Was  there  ever  hatred  more  bitter 
than  that  which  made  scribes  and  Pharisees,  Sad- 
ducees  and  Herodians  forget  their  mutual  jealousies 
and  join  hands  to  bring  him  to  the  cross  ?  And  was 
there  ever  devotion  like  that  which  bound  those 
humble  fishermen  of  Galilee  to  his  person,  and  which 
inspired  them  for  his  sake  to  defy  all  the  great  and 
powerful  of  the  land  ?  When  the  great  crisis  in  his 
Galilean  ministry  had  come,  when  for  a  moment  it 
looked  as  if  all  men  were  leaving  him,  and  when  he 
turned  to  the  disciples  with  the  question,  "  Will  ye 
also  go  away  ? ''  the  foremost  of  them  exclaimed, 
"  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go  ?  thou  hast  the  words 
of  eternal  life.  And  we  have  believed  and  know  that 
thou  art  the  Holy  One  of  God"  (Jn.  6:68,  69). 
And  in  that  faith  they  persisted,  following  him 
through  obloquy  and  shame  to  the  end;  and  al- 
though they  were  for  a  moment  scattered  by  the 
tragic  issue  of  his  conflict  with  his  enemies,  they 
soon  rallied  from  what  they  had  believed  to  be  his 
defeat;  and  they  began  to  look  upon  his  cross  of 
shame  as  the  very  symbol  of  victory,  with  which 
they  now  started  out  to  conquer  the  world. 

And  the  impression  which  Jesus  thus  made  upon 
his  contemporaries,  he  has  continued  to  make  upon 


INTRODUCTION  17 

every  generation  since  then.  Though  his  followers 
started  out  with  no  other  w^eapon  than  the  gospel, 
which  to  the  Jews  was  a  stumblingblock  and  to  the 
Greeks  foolishness,  they  yet  won  their  way  in  the 
face  of  all  opposition,  until  their  faith  became  the 
accepted  religion  of  the  empire,  and  until  the  advent 
of  their  Lord  came  to  be  regarded  as  the  central  fact 
in  all  history.  And  that  victory  has  persisted 
throughout  the  centuries.  Though  still  rejected  and 
derided  by  many,  Jesus  Christ  is  the  greatest  force 
in  the  world  to-day.  He  is  still  the  subject  of  keener 
discussions,  bitterer  controversies,  and  profounder 
study  than  any  other  character  in  history.  And 
what  is  more,  he  is  still  inspiring  a  larger  number 
of  men  with  deeper  devotion  and  more  heroic  en- 
deavour than  any  other  man  that  has  ever  lived. 

2.     The  Influence  of  Jesus  that  of  a  Teacher 

What  is  the  secret  of  this  marvellous  influence? 
It  would  be  incorrect  to  ascribe  it  solely  to  any  one 
aspect  of  his  many-sided  character.  We  would  not 
be  understood  as  implying  that  he  was  only,  or  even 
mainly,  a  teacher.  He  was  vastly  more  than  that; 
and  regard  must  be  had  for  other  aspects  of  his  mar- 
vellous personality,  if  one  would  estimate  aright  his 
great  influence  upon  men.  Yet  he  was  a  great 
teacher;  and  a  large  part  of  his  influence  must  be 
attributed  to  the  power  of  his  message. 

A  distinction  should,  no  doubt,  be  made  between 


18  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

Jesus'  preaching  and  his  teaching.  The  former  con- 
sisted in  the  simple  proclamation  of  the  glad  tidings 
of  the  kingdom.  This  he  did  everywhere,  so  that 
Mark  opens  his  account  of  the  ministry  by  saying, 
"  ISTow  after  John  was  delivered  up,  Jesus  came  into 
Galilee,  preaching  the  gospel  of  the  kingdom " 
(Mk.  1:14).  But  Jesus  did  more  than  preach. 
He  expounded  unto  the  people  everywhere  the  sig- 
nificance of  his  message.  ^'  And  they  go  into 
Capernaum;  and  straightway  on  the  sabbath  day 
he  entered  into  the  synagogue  and  taught ''  (Mk. 
1:21).  And  that  statement,  "he  taught  them,''  is 
repeated  over  and  over  again  in  the  Synoptic  record. 
It  was  the  daily  occupation  of  his  public  ministry. 
Other  activities,  such  as  his  marvellous  cures,  may 
have  attracted  more  attention;  but  this  was  his  con- 
stant work  from  day  to  day.  At  first  he  taught  the 
multitudes  everywhere,  wherever  they  might  gather 
together  to  hear  him ;  afterwards,  when  he  had  passed 
the  crisis  of  his  great  ministry,  he  went  into  retire- 
ment, only  however  for  the  sake  now  of  instructing 
the  Twelve. 

And  the  impression,  which  was  from  the  begin- 
ning produced  by  his  teaching,  was  most  profound. 
This,  too,  the  evangelists  have  not  failed  to  record. 
Mark  records,  at  the  very  beginning  of  his  Gospel, 
how  "  they  were  astonished  at  his  teaching  '^  (1 :  22). 
Matthew  also  makes  mention  of  the  fact.  After  re- 
cording the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  he  goes  on  to 
say,  "  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Jesus  had  finished 


INTRODUCTION  19 

these  words,  the  multitudes  were  astonished  at  his 
teaching''  (Mt.  7:28).  And  both  give  the  same 
reason  for  the  astonishment.  "  For  he  taught  them 
as  one  having  authority,  and  not  as  the  scribes " 
(Mk.  1:22;  Mt.  7:29).  There  was  that  in  his 
teaching  which  spoke  home  to  the  hearts  and  minds 
of  men,  and  which  '^  found  them."  Men  are  every- 
where open  to  the  truth ;  they  have  an  intuitive  per- 
ception of  it;  and  whenever  it  is  proclaimed  with 
directness  and  sincerity,  they  respond  to  it.  Men  are 
governed  by  ideas;  and  wherever  any  one  is  able 
to  open  up  to  them  a  new  realm  of  truth  and  reality, 
they  become  willing  listeners  and  enthusiastic  fol- 
lowers. Conviction  and  evident  sincerity  on  the 
part  of  the  teacher,  and  truth  in  the  message  which 
he  proclaims  exert  an  influence  which  nothing  in  the 
world  can  resist.  Especially  is  this  the  case,  when 
the  truth,  which  is  proclaimed,  touches  that  deepest 
of  all  chords  in  the  hearts  of  men — the  chord  which 
binds  them  to  their  Maker;  for  all  men  have  a  con- 
sciousness of  God,  which  controls  the  inmost  springs 
of  their  hearts. 

!N'ow,  just  these  are  the  factors,  which  we  find  in 
the  teaching  of  Jesus,  and  which  gave  to  it  its  tre- 
mendous power.  His  voice  had  the  ring  of  sin- 
cerity. It  was  this  ring  of  sincerity  in  all  that  he 
said  and  did  that  caused  his  disciples  to  apply  to 
him  the  prophecy  of  the  sixty-ninth  psalm  and  ninth 
verse,  "  The  zeal  of  thine  house  shall  eat  me  up  " 
(Jn.  2: 17).     Then,  he  spake  the  truth,  and  in  such 


20  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

a  manner  that  it  went  home  directly  to  the  hearts 
and  consciences  of  men.  An  illustration  is  found  in 
that  touching  story,  which  has  been  preserved  at 
the  opening  of  the  eighth  chapter  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel.  When  Jesus  had  spoken  to  the  woman's 
accusers,  they  '^  went  out  one  by  one,  beginning 
from  the  eldest,  even  unto  the  last ''  (Jn.  8:9).  His 
word  had  in  it  that  sharp  thrust  of  truth,  which  went 
home  to  the  heart.  And  it  went  home,  because  there 
was  in  it  that  which  appealed  to  their  consciousness 
of  Grod.  His  words  satisfied  men's  hunger  for  him 
who  is  invisible.  His  teaching  was  a  revelation  of 
God. 

3.     The  Supreme  Revelation 

And  not  simply  was  his  teaching  a  revelation,  it 
was  the  revelation,  the  revelation  in  which  God  spake 
to  men  as  he  has  spoken  nowhere  else.  This  is  the 
conviction,  which  forced  itself  upon  the  disciples  at 
an  early  period ;  and  it  became  the  settled  conviction 
of  the  primitive  church,  and  has  continued  to  be  the 
conviction  of  the  church  to  the  present  day.  Seldom, 
if  ever,  has  it  been  challenged ;  and  those  even,  who 
are  inclined  to  dispute  the  Christology  which  has 
usually  been  accepted  in  the  historic  creeds  and  con- 
fessions, yet  make  their  appeal  to  the  teaching  of 
Jesus. 

This  conviction  was  undoubtedly  from  the  begin- 
ning based  on  the  claim  which  Jesus  had  made  for 
himself.    He  himself  said,  "  All  things  are  delivered 


INTRODUCTION  21 

unto  me  of  mj  Father :  and  no  one  knoweth  the  Son, 
save  the  Father;  neither  doth  any  know  the  Father, 
save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  willeth 
to  reveal  him"  (Mt.  11:27;  Lk.  10:22).  Re- 
ported by  the  two  evangelists  in  the  same  form,  the 
passage  belongs  to  the  oldest  tradition,  and  its  gen- 
uineness is  beyond  dispute.  Attempts  have  been 
made  to  break  its  peculiar  force;  but  that  the  state- 
ment was  understood  by  the  first  interpreters  of 
Jesus  as  implying  a  claim  to  a  unique  relation  to 
God,  a  relation  which  gave  him  a  knowledge  of  God 
altogether  peculiar,  and  which  placed  him  in  a  posi- 
tion for  making  the  full  and  final  revelation  of  the 
Father,  there  can  be  no  doubt.  For  that  was  the 
view  held  by  the  earliest  of  the  Xew  Testament 
writers;  and  it  is  well  nigh  inconceivable  that  they 
should  have  taught  what  they  did,  if  they  had  not 
understood  Jesus  himself  as  making  the  claim  at- 
tributed to  him  in  the  passage. 

We  know  that  Paul  looked  upon  Jesus  as  the 
eternal  Son  of  God,  who  by  his  unique  relation  to 
the  Father  was  enabled  to  give  us  the  perfect  revela- 
tion of  the  Father's  glory.  "  Seeing  it  is  God,  that 
said.  Light  shall  shine  out  of  the  darkness,  who 
shined  in  our  hearts  to  give  light  of  the  knowledge 
of  the  glory  of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ " 
(2  Cor.  4:  6).  "Who  is  the  image  of  the  invisible 
God,  the  firstborn  of  all  creation"  (Col.  1:15). 
"  In  whom  are  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and 
knowledge  hidden"   (Col.  2:3).     'No  sane  exegesis 


22  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

can,  I  think,  make  anything  else  out  of  such  state- 
ments than  that  Paul  conceived  of  Jesus  as  giving 
us  the  supreme  revelation  of  God. 

The  thought  is  brought  out  with  still  greater  clear- 
ness and  force  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  The 
purpose  of  the  author  was  to  prove  to  certain  Chris- 
tians, who  were  in  danger  of  apostasy,  that  Chris- 
tianity is  the  final  and  the  perfect  religion.  In  his 
argument,  he  places  Jesus  into  a  number  of  contrasts, 
showing  his  superiority  to  the  prophets,  the  angels, 
Moses  and  Aaron.  The  first  contrast  is  drawn  in  the 
opening  verses  of  the  epistle.  ^'  God,  having  of  old 
time  spoken  unto  the  fathers  in  the  prophets  by 
divers  portions  and  in  divers  manners,  hath  at  the 
end  of  these  days  spoken  unto  us  in  his  Son,  whom 
he  appointed  heir  of  all  things,  through  whom  also 
he  made  the  worlds;  who  being  the  effulgence  of 
his  glory,  and  the  very  image  of  his  substance,  and 
upholding  all  things  by  the  word  of  his  power,  when 
he  had  made  purification  of  sins,  sat  down  on  the 
right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high"  (Heb.  1: 1-3). 
The  revelation  in  the  prophets  had  been  given  "  in 
divers  portions,"  bit  by  bit,  and  "  in  divers  man- 
ners," as  the  people  were  able  to  receive  and  under- 
stand it.  But  Jesus  stood  to  God  in  the  relation  of 
a  son;  he  knew  the  inmost  heart  of  God  through 
that  relation  of  love  which  his  sonship  implied ;  and 
such  was  his  likeness  to  the  Father  that  he  is  de- 
scribed as  "  the  effulgence  of  his  glory,  and  the  very 
image  of  his  substance."    He  was  himself  the  mani- 


INTRODUCTION  23 

feetation  of  the  Father's  character,  just  as  the  light 
which  streams  forth  from  the  sun  is  the  manifesta- 
tion of  what  the  sun  is;  and  just  as  we  can  know 
what  the  sun  is  only  through  the  rays  which  stream 
forth  from  it,  so  can  we  know  what  God  is  only 
through  Jesus,  the  effulgence  of  his  glory. 

The  thought  reaches  its  fullest  expression  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel.  Here  we  have  the  statement,  "  E'o 
man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time;  the  only  begotten 
Son,  who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  he  hath  de- 
clared him"  (Jn.  1:18).  The  only  begotten  Son 
is  identified  with  the  eternal  Word,  through  whom 
the  otherwise  invisible  and  unknowable  God  has 
come  forth  in  self-expression.  And  this  eternal  Word 
is  further  identified  with  the  historic  Jesus.  *^  The 
Word  became  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us  (and  we 
beheld  his  glory,  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten  from 
the  Father),  full  of  grace  and  truth"  (Jn.  1:14). 
Jesus  was  the  Word  incarnate,  in  whom  dwelt  "  the 
fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily"  (Col.  2:9);  and 
because  of  that  he  could  say,  "He  that  hath  seen 
me  hath  seen  the  Father  "  (Jn.  14:  9). 

The  revelation  of  Jesus,  therefore,  is  the  norm, 
by  which  all  other  revelations  must  be  judged.  We 
accept  the  teaching  of  the  prophets  in  as  far  as  they 
are  found  to  be  in  agreement  with  Jesus.  If  at  any 
point  their  conception  falls  short  of  his,  we  have 
no  hesitancy  in  setting  it  aside  as  belonging  to  an 
economy  which  has  been  superseded.  The  same  holds 
true  of  the  apostles  and  prophets  of  the  'New  Testa- 


24  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

ment.  They  were  at  best  sinful  men,  as  the  rest  of 
us  are,  and,  though  they  were  under  the  special  guid- 
ance of  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  were  fallible,  as  we 
are.  Peter,  as  we  know,  erred  most  grievously  at 
Antioch ;  and  he  was  sharply  rebuked  by  Paul  (Gal. 
2 :  11,  12).  Paul  distinguishes  between  what  he  says 
and  what  he  had  received  from  the  Lord  (1  Cor. 
7 :  10)  ;  and  he  does  not  hesitate  to  give  the  prefer- 
ence to  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  And  following  his 
example,  we  are  under  the  necessity  of  comparing 
his  teaching  with  that  of  the  Master.  Where  he 
agrees  with  the  revelation  of  Jesus,  all  are  ready  to 
accept  his  doctrine ;  should  any  one  succeed  in  show- 
ing that  he  teaches  a  different  doctrine,  we  should 
have  to  reject  his  teaching.  And  the  same  is  true 
of  the  historic  creeds  and  confessions.  In  as  far  as 
they  are  a  correct  formulation  of  the  revelation  of 
Jesus,  they  must  be  accepted;  wherever  they  con- 
tradict that  revelation,  they  must  be  rejected.  Yea, 
and  if  any  of  them  contain  statements  based  on  im- 
perfect or  mistaken  interpretations  of  his  words, 
they  must  be  superseded  by  new  and  more  adequate 
formulas. 


4.    Present  Day  Appeals  to  the  Teaching  of  Jesus 

This  position  is  now  generally  accepted ;  and  hence 
we  have  had  the  cry,  '^  back  to  Christ,"  from  more 
than  one  quarter.  In  the  attempted  reconstructions 
of  doctrine  and  life,  which  are  going  on  on  all  sides. 


INTRODUCTION  25 

men  have  made  their  appeal  to  the  revelation  of 
Jesus.  These  appeals  have  been  of  a  twofold  char- 
acter, doctrinal  and  practical. 

In  the  attempted  doctrinal  reconstructions  of  the 
present  day,  the  appeal  has  been  from  the  traditional 
dogmas  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  Christian  theology 
has  been  very  largely  under  the  dominance  of  the 
Pauline  influence.  What  is  known  as  Paulinism  in 
the  narrower  sense  has  been  disputed  again  and 
again.  It  has  been  allowed  to  fall  quietly  into  the 
background,  as  during  the  semi-Pelagian  reaction  and 
during  the  period  preceding  the  Reformation.  And 
yet  even  in  that  form,  it  has  reasserted  itself  again 
and  again.  But  taking  Paul's  conception  of  Christ 
and  of  the  Christian  redemption  in  the  deepest  and 
broadest  sense,  and  there  has  scarcely  been  a  dissent. 
As  Professor  A.  C.  McGiffert  says,  "  The  entire 
system  of  Christianity  hangs  together.  .  .  .  As  a 
matter  of  fact  it  can  be  traced  back  in  all  its  essen- 
tial features  to  the  second  century  of  our  era.  .  .  . 
And  not  simply  can  the  historic  system  be  traced 
back  to  the  second  century;  it  can  all  be  found  in 
Paul."  ^  But  he  raises  the  question,  "  Where  did  it 
come  from  ?  Was  Jesus  its  author,  or  was  Paul  ?  " 
After  a  somewhat  lengthy  discussion  of  the  subject, 
he  concludes  that  the  entire  doctrinal  system  of  the 
Christian  church  owes  its  origin  to  Paul;  and  he 
then  places  the  accepted  doctrinal  system  into  con- 
trast with  the  teaching  of  Jesus.    He  concludes  that 

^  The  American  Journal  of  Theology,  1909,  p.  15. 


26  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

a  liberal  Christianity,  which  bases  its  teaching  on 
the  revelation  of  Jesus,  has  consistently  and  prop- 
erly broken  with  the  historic  dogmas  which  have 
prevailed  from  Paul's  day  to  this. 

Professor  McGiffert  places  the  matter  in  such 
clear  light  that  we  venture  to  quote  his  words  at  some 
length.  His  statement  gives  us  an  excellent  illus- 
tration of  one  kind  of  appeal  that  is  being  made  to 
the  teaching  of  Jesus,  and  what  are  the  conclusions 
which  some  very  able  scholars  are  drawing  from  it. 
He  says :  "  One  thing  is  clear.  Between  Paul  and 
the  Jesus  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  the  connection  is 
very  close.  Many  of  the  essential  features  of  Paul's 
system  reappear  in  that  Gospel;  the  necessity  of 
regeneration  changing  a  man  from  a  fleshly  to  a 
spiritual  being  (Jn.,  chap.  3),  union  with  Christ 
(chap.  15),  the  deity  of  Christ  (chap.  1  and  often), 
the  sacramental  view  of  baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper  (chaps.  3  and  6) — all  these  are  found  in  the 
teaching  of  the  Johannine  Christ.  But  all  the  more 
striking  by  contrast  is  the  lack  of  these  elements  in 
the  teaching  of  Jesus  as  recorded  in  the  Synoptic 
Gospels.  Of  the  essential  fleshly  and  evil  nature  of 
man  nothing  is  said ;  nothing  of  the  consequent  need 
of  regeneration;  nothing  of  the  mystical  union  with 
Christ,  and  nothing  of  his  deity ;  and  no  trace  of  the 
sacramental  appears  in  connection  with  baptism  and 
the  Lord's  Supper.  It  is  not  merely  a  difference  of 
emphasis  or  of  statement.  There  is  wanting  alto- 
gether in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  the  great  and  con- 


INTRODUCTION  Tl 

sistent  body  of  teaching,  which  is  not  merely  present, 
but  is  fundamental  and  controlling  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel  and  in  the  First  Epistle  of  John.  When  this 
is  once  recognized  it  must  be  clear  that  that  body 
of  teaching  came  from  some  other  source  than  Jesus 
himself;  and  the  conclusion  can  hardly  be  resisted 
that  it  came  from  Paul,  in  whose  writings  it  is 
found,  and  whose  experience  fully  accounts  for  its 
origin.  The  despair  into  which  he  had  fallen  as  a 
result  of  his  total  inability  to  keep  the  law  of  God, 
as  he  felt  it  ought  to  be  kept,  a  despair  shared  by  no 
other  Christian  of  his  day,  so  far  as  we  know;  the 
revelation  of  Christ  as  a  spiritual  being  freed  from 
evil  flesh,  a  revelation  whose  tremendous  and  revolu- 
tionary influence  can  be  matched  nowhere  else  in  the 
first  century;  his  contact  with  hellenistic  life  and 
thought,  making  the  dualistic  explanation  of  human 
corruption  more  natural  to  him  than  to  Jesus  and 
his  primitive  disciples;  the  cataclysmic  character  of 
his  conversion,  rendering  the  cataclysmic  interpreta- 
tion of  Christian  experience  and  the  Christian  life 
almost  inevitable  to  him — all  this  makes  it  easy  to 
explain  the  remarkable  conception  of  Christianity 
which  appears  first  in  his  epistles  and  which  can  be 
accounted  for  in  no  other  way."  ^ 

The  appeal  is  from  Paul  to  Jesus;  and  because 
Professor  McGifiert  finds  a  disagreement  between 
the  two,  he  does  not  hesitate  to  discredit  the  teaching 
of  Paul  and  that  entire  system  of  doctrine  which  has 

I  Op.  ciu,  pp.  17,  18. 


28  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

been  based  upon  it.  ISTothing  could  better  bring  to 
our  minds  the  serious  character  of  the  appeal  that 
is  being  made  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  nor  illustrate 
the  tremendous  challenge  which  that  appeal  makes 
to  all  earnest  thinkers  of  the  present  day.  The  chal- 
lenge (however  much  one  may  disagree  with  Pro- 
fessor McGiffert)  calls  for  a  new  study  of  the  teach- 
ing of  Jesus  and  for  a  reexamination  of  the  funda- 
mentals of  our  Christian  theology. 

And  there  is  yet  another  appeal  to  the  teaching  of 
Jesus.  There  is  much  in  our  modern  Christianity, 
as  that  is  found  exemplified  in  the  life  of  professed 
Christians  of  the  present  day  and  in  that  of  our 
organized  churches,  against  which  the  modern  con- 
science has  revolted.  Our  civilization  calls  itself 
Christian ;  and  yet  there  is  in  it  very  much  which  is 
far  from  Christlike.  Conditions  have  been  precipi- 
tated by  our  modern  industrial  order  which  have 
created  widespread  discontent.  It  has  introduced  in- 
equalities between  the  rich  and  poor  which  seem 
incompatible  with  the  idea  of  brotherhood.  The 
poor  have  been  sinking  deeper  and  deeper  into  misery 
and  want.  The  number  of  the  helpless  and  de- 
pendent is  becoming  greater  and  greater.  At  the 
same  time  the  rich  are  revelling  in  senseless  and 
wasteful  luxuries.  Many  who  call  themselves  Chris- 
tians, and  who  occupy  the  foremost  seats  in  the 
synagogue  on  the  Lord's  day,  spend  the  remaining 
six  days  of  the  week  in  questionable  business  and 
financial  transactions.     Though  they  give  munificent 


INTRODUCTION  29 

gifts  for  so-called  charitable  purposes,  the  poor  are 
looking  upon  those  gifts  with  ever-increasing  sus- 
picion. They  regard  such  munificence  very  much  in 
the  same  light  as  the  ancient  prophets  looked  upon 
robberies  as  burnt-offerings.  They  look  upon  them 
as  an  effort  to  cover  their  wicked  practices.  And 
not  only  are  the  masses  revolting  against  the  injus- 
tice of  our  civilization,  as  that  is  exemplified  in  our 
industrial  order;  they  are  beginning  to  cry  out 
against  much  that  is  considered  unchristian  in  our 
so-called  Christian  governments.  Especially  are  they 
beginning  to  protest  against'  the  burdens  which  are 
being  laid  upon  them  by  the  insensate  race  for  in- 
creased armies  and  navies.  And  in  making  their 
protest,  they  appeal  to  the  life  and  teaching  of  Jesus. 
Such  things,  they  claim,  are  unchristian;  and  they 
appeal  from  the  Christianity  of  our  modern  organ- 
ized churches  to  the  Christianity  of  Jesus. 

If  anything  the  latter  appeal  is  more  serious  than 
the  former.  That  is  concerned  with  our  intellectual 
apprehension  of  Christianity;  this  has  to  do  with 
our  Christian  life.  That  has  grown  out  of  a  wide- 
spread intellectual  revolt  against  accepted  dogma; 
this  was  bom  from  an  earnest  desire  to  realize  a 
higher  and  better  standard  of  Christian  living.  But 
both  appeals  are  serious  to  the  last  degree.  They 
come  to  us  with  a  demand  for  a  new  study  of  the  life 
and  teaching  of  Jesus.  They  present  a  problem 
which  no  honest  student  of  the  I^ew  Testament  dare 
decline. 


30  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

5.    The  Problem 

What  is  the  nature  of  this  problem?  It  is  to 
ascertain  just  what  Jesus  was  and  what  he  taught. 
At  first  sight  it  might  seem  simple  enough.  The 
appeal  is  from  the  orthodoxy  of  the  present  day  to 
the  teaching  of  Jesus,  from  the  life  of  our  organized 
Christianity  to  the  life  of  the  Master.  Is  it  not 
enough  to  go  to  our  ISTew  Testaments,  and  there  read 
what  he  taught  and  how  he  lived  ?  ISTo ;  the  problem 
is  far  more  complicated.  Jesus  wrote  nothing.  We 
are  dependent  for  our  knowledge  of  his  teaching  on 
reports  which  have  been  handed  down  by  his  dis- 
ciples. So  far  as  we  know,  none  of  his  sayings  or 
sermons  were  taken  do^vn  on  the  spot.  His  teaching 
was  first  handed  down  by  oral  tradition;  and  when 
it  was  finally  reduced  to  writing,  it  assumed  slightly 
variant  forms  in  the  several  Gospels.  The  same  say- 
ings are  sometimes  reported  in  different  forms  by 
the  several  evangelists.  There  is  hence  always  the 
question,  What  did  he  actually  say  ?  And  when  that 
has  been  determined,  there  remains  another,  often 
more  important  and  far  more  difficult,  namely, 
What  did  he  mean  ? 

A  brief  glance  at  each  of  these  questions  may 
serve  to  bring  before  us  the  nature  of  the  problem,  as 
well  as  its  difficulty  and  delicacy. 

The  former  is  a  question  of  criticism.  This  is 
made  imperative  by  the  manner  in  which  the  Gos- 
pels came  into  existence.     If  Jesus  had  carefully 


INTRODUCTION  31 

written  down  his  teaching  in  books,  like  Plato,  or  if 
he  had  transmitted  it  in  carefully  written  epistles, 
like  Paul,  the  case  would  be  different.  But  he  chose 
to  write  it  upon  the  living  tablets  of  human  hearts ; 
and  he  depended  upon  his  disciples  to  reproduce  it 
and  give  it  to  the  world.  Even  if  the  disciples  had 
at  once  written  down  what  they  had  heard  him  say, 
the  necessity  for  criticism  would  not  be  so  urgent. 
But  as  we  said  above,  there  is  no  evidence  that  they 
did  anything  of  the  kind.  There  seems  at  first  to 
have  been  no  thought  even  of  a  written  record  of  the 
words  and  acts  of  Jesus.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it 
was  not  until  some  time  had  elapsed  that  the  first 
beginnings  of  Gospel  narrative  were  made.  Those 
who  first  wrote  down  what  Jesus  had  said  and  done 
were,  no  doubt,  perfectly  honest.  They  had  excel- 
lent facilities  for  ascertaining  the  facts  in  the  case. 
But  they  could  not  divest  themselves  of  their  per- 
sonality. They  could  only  report  his  words  and 
deeds  as  they  understood  them.  There  is,  indeed, 
evidence  here  and  there  that  they  reported  words 
and  incidents,  the  full  significance  of  which  they 
did  not  comprehend;  but,  as  a  rule,  they  reported 
the  words  of  Jesus,  as  they  understood  them.  They, 
moreover,  each  wrote  with  a  purpose  of  his  own. 
And  they  not  only  arranged  all  their  material  with 
a  view  to  the  purpose  which  they  had  in  mind ;  but 
they  often  cast  it  into  a  form  to  suit  the  end  in  view. 
So  that  there  is  a  personal  equation,  in  the  case  of 
each  evangelist,  which  must  be  constantly  kept  in 


32  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

mind.  And  because  of  this  fact,  it  is  often  difficult, 
yea,  impossible,  to  determine  the  exact  words  which 
Jesus  used.  In  some  cases,  where  there  is  a  dis- 
crepancy, we  may  determine  from  the  context  what 
Jesus  must  have  meant  to  say.  Where  this  can  not 
be  done,  we  must  rely  upon  the  general  tenor  and 
spirit  of  his  teaching.  In  all  such  cases,  however,  we 
need  to  remember  that  our  results  are  obtained  by 
a  process  of  deduction  and  criticism;  and  we  can 
not  put  forward  our  conclusions  with  the  certainty 
of  a  ^'  thus  saith  the  Lord." 

After  criticism  comes  interpretation.  After  we 
have  ascertained  as  nearly  as  possible  what  Jesus  did 
say  on  a  given  subject,  we  must  raise  the  question, 
What  did  he  mean  ? 

A  great  teacher  is  always  greater  than  the  mere 
words  which  he  may  utter.  While  his  teaching  is 
one  of  the  ways  for  studying  his  personality,  a 
knowledge  of  his  personality  is  necessary  before  one 
can  understand  his  teaching.  Of  no  one  is  this  more 
true  than  of  Jesus.  His  teaching  must  be  inter- 
preted on  the  background  of  his  life.  And  if  the 
question  be  raised,  How  may  this  be  done?  our  an- 
swer must  be  twofold. 

We  must  approach  the  teaching  from  the  stand- 
point of  his  entire  life  and  spirit.  We  must  get 
before  us  a  picture  of  his  life.  This  is  far  more 
difficult  than  is  often  imagined,  and  also  far  more 
important.  Every  one  acquainted  with  the  modern 
Jesus-research  knows  how  many  scholars  have  given 


INTRODUCTION  33 

their  best  endeavours  to  the  task  of  reproducing  a 
picture  of  the  historical  Jesus,  as  he  lived  and  walked 
here  among  men;  and  he  knows  also  how^  various 
have  been  the  answers  to  the  question  w^ho  and  what 
Jesus  was.  And  beyond  that  every  one  who  would 
correctly  interpret  the  sayings  of  Jesus  must  be  in 
living  sympathy  and  touch  with  the  spirit  which 
animated  what  he  said  and  did;  for  one  who  is  of 
a  different  spirit  can  never  fully  enter  into  his  mean- 
ing. There  is  a  spirit  which  breathes  through  all  that 
he  said  and  did ;  and  the  interpreter  must  get  himself 
into  rapport  with  that  spirit,  before  he  can  hope  to 
enter  sympathetically  into  his  thought.  So  long  as 
he  looks  at  the  teaching  of  Jesus  from  a  different 
point  of  view,  he  is  sure  to  misunderstand  him. 
Hence  the  problem  is  transferred  from  the  sphere 
of  criticism  to  that  of  life.  As  the  teaching  must 
be  interpreted  on  the  background  of  the  life  of  Jesus, 
so  tJie  interpretation  must  proceed  on  the  basis  of 
the  life  which  the  student  himself  lives.  The  student 
must  live  himself  into  the  spirit,  which  breathed 
through  all  that  Jesus  said  and  did;  otherwise  he 
will  be  blind  to  his  real  meaning. 

Regard  must  also  be  had  to  those  who  were  with 
Jesus  during  his  public  ministry.  ISTot  that  we 
assume  that  they  were  always  correct  in  their  esti- 
mate. We  know  from  the  records  that  they  were 
sometimes  mistaken.  But  they  had  opportunities  for 
knowing  him  such  as  no  generation  since  then  has 
had.     They  saw  his  daily  life.     They  heard  him 


34.  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

speak.  They  had  the  opportunity  of  marking  his 
tones  and  accents.  They  could  see  the  light  kindle 
in  his  eyes.  They  had  experience  of  his  goodness 
and  love.  They  hence  had  an  opportunity  of  form- 
ing an  estimate  of  his  personality  such  as  we  do 
not  possess  at  the  present  day.  Hence  if,  in  our 
study,  we  find  the  immediate  disciples  forming  a 
certain  estimate  of  his  personality,  and  by  common 
consent  putting  a  certain  interpretation  on  his  words, 
we  have  at  least  a  strong  presumption  of  its  cor- 
rectness. 


n 

OUR  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION 

THE  basis  for  our  study  must  be  the  Synoptic 
Gospels.  For  this  there  are  two  reasons.  By 
common  consent,  we  have  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  there  more  nearly  in  its  original  form  than 
anywhere  else;  and,  because  of  that  fact,  the  appeal 
has  been  to  that  teaching  as  over  against  Paul  and 
John.  We,  of  course,  distinguish  between  the  reve- 
lation of  Jesus  and  his  mere  words.  The  former 
is  much  the  broader  conception;  and  yet  the  words 
of  Jesus  must  be  our  starting-point.  Whatever  in- 
formation we  may  be  able  to  gather  from  other 
sources  must  ultimately  be  measured  and  judged  by 
them;  and  while  other  sources  may  help  in  inter- 
preting the  words  attributed  to  Jesus,  we  can  admit 
of  no  contradiction  between  them  and  any  other 
teaching.  Should  it  be  found,  on  careful  examina- 
tion, that  the  teaching  of  either  Paul  or  John  is  con- 
trary to  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  as  found  in  the  Synop- 
tics, we  should  have  to  give  the  preference  to  the 
latter. 

Once  it  would  have  been  enough  simply  to  say 
this.  All  that  was  required  was  to  ascertain  what 
the  words  of  Jesus  are,  as  reported  in  the  Synoptics. 
The  Gospels  were  regarded  as  of  equal  value,  and  all 

35 


36  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

the  words  of  Jesus,  as  therein  reported,  as  of  equal 
authority.  But  careful  study  of  the  Synoptic  Gos- 
pels has  revealed  the  fact  that  they  are  interde- 
pendent, and  that  they  rest  upon  easily  distinguish- 
able sources.  Matthew  and  Luke  clearly  used  Mark ; 
and  ninety-three  per  cent  of  his  material  is  taken 
up  by  one  or  the  other,  or  both.  Once  men  were 
accustomed  to  speak  of  the  triple  tradition,  meaning 
thereby  the  matter  common  to  the  three;  and  any 
statement  found  in  this  triple  tradition  was  sup- 
posed to  have  a  threefold  attestation,  and  to  be  con- 
sequently by  so  much  the  more  authoritative.  More 
careful  study,  however,  has  revealed  the  fact  that 
such  is  not  the  case.  If  Matthew  and  Luke  in  their 
narrative  sections  both  copied  Mark,  there  is  really 
not  a  triple  tradition.  All  rest  upon  the  same 
source;  and  they  have  the  authority  which  that 
source  possesses,  not  very  much  more.  It  is  also 
quite  clear  that  Matthew  and  Luke  have  much  ma- 
terial in  common,  which  is  not  found  in  Mark.  Here 
the  verbal  resemblances  are  more  marked  than  in  the 
material  which  they  have  in  common  with  Mark. 
We  hence  conclude  that  they  had  a  second  source,  not 
known  to  Mark,  or  else  very  sparingly  used  by  him. 
This  is  now  generally  designated  by  the  symbol  Q, 
though  by  many  'New  Testament  students  identified 
with  the  Matthsean  Logia.  Another  fact  is  also  ap- 
parent. There  is  a  large  section  in  Luke,  chaps. 
9 :51-18 :  14,  which  contains  much  material  not 
found  in  either  Matthew  or  Mark.    Luke  must  hence 


OUR  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION       87 

have  had  still  another  source.  So  there  are  brief  pas- 
sages peculiar  to  Matthew,  which  seem  to  imply  that 
the  author  of  the  First  Gospel  also  had  still  other 
sources  of  information. 

'NoWy  the  student  who  would  carefully  estimate 
and  accurately  interpret  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  must 
have  regard  to  these  sources,  which  lie  back  of  our 
present  Gospels ;  and,  before  he  is  ready  to  pronounce 
a  judgment  on  any  point,  he  must  try  to  ascertain 
the  character  and  the  authority  which  they  possess. 
And  there  is  a  manifest  advantage  in  so  doing;  for 
the  Gospels  themselves  are,  none  of  them,  much  older 
than  the  year  seventy.  Between  the  time  when 
Jesus  taught  and  the  time  when  the  earliest  of  them 
was  written  almost  a  generation  passed  away.  How 
can  we  be  sure  that  the  words,  which  they  attribute 
to  him,  were  really  spoken  by  him?  He  himself 
wrote  nothing.  He  was  content  to  write  his  teaching 
on  the  living  tablets  of  the  hearts  of  his  disciples. 
How  can  we  feel  confident  that  what  is  reported  as 
from  him  really  came  from  his  lips  ?  The  question 
requires  us  to  inquire  into  the  method  by  which  the 
teaching  of  Jesus  was  transmitted ;  and  that  necessi- 
tates a  discussion  of  the  sources  which  lie  back  of 
the  Gospels,  as  we  now  have  them. 

1.    The  Oral  Gospel 

"  '  Commit  nothing  to  writing '  was  a  maxim  with 
the  Rabbis  " ;  and  we  know  that  for  a  long  while 


38  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

their  interpretation  of  the  law  was  preserved  by 
means  of  oral  teaching.  It  was  the  business  of  the 
Chazzan  (the  attendant,  Lk.  4:20)  in  the  Jewish 
synagogue  to  teach  the  boys ;  and  the  instruction  con- 
sisted abnost  entirely  of  oral  lessons  out  of  the  law 
and  out  of  the  tradition  which  had  been  handed 
down.  And  there  were  those  who  had  thus  com- 
mitted a  large  part  of  the  Old  Testament,  some  per- 
haps the  whole  of  it.  This  point  it  is  important  to 
remember  in  our  study  of  the  manner  in  which  the 
gospel  was  at  first  transmitted;  for  the  first  Chris- 
tians were  all  Jews,  and  had  learned  the  methods 
of  the  synagogue.  And  w^hen  they  began  to  teach,  as 
we  are  told  in  the  opening  chapters  of  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles  they  did  from  the  very  beginning,  they 
employed  ,the  methods  with  which  they  were 
familiar. 

One  of  the  characteristics  of  the  first  congregation 
at  Jerusalem  was  just  this — that  its  members  "  con- 
tinued stedfastly  in  the  apostles'  teaching  and  fellow- 
ship, in  the  breaking  of  bread  and  the  prayers  " 
(Acts  2:42).  There  was  a  distinction  made  be- 
tween teaching  and  preaching  (Acts  5:42).  The 
latter  consisted  especially  in  the  proclamation  of  the 
glad  tidings  to  those  that  were  without ;  the  former, 
in  communicating  to  those  who  believed  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  life  and  teachings  of  the  Lord  Jesus. 
When  the  apostles  taught  in  the  temple  and  at  home, 
they  instructed  those  who  attended  after  the  manner 
which  was  common  in  the  synagogue;  and  the  par- 


OUR  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION   39 

ticular  lesson  to  be  taught  would  be  repeated,  as  the 
Chazzan  in  the  synagogue  repeated  a  passage  from 
the  law,  until  those  in  attendance  had  committed  it 
to  memory.  This  seems  to  be  implied  in  the  word, 
which  is  used  for  "  instructed.''  When  Luke,  in 
writing  to  Theophilus,  says,  "  That  thou  mightest 
know  the  certainty  concerning  the  things  wherein 
thou  wast  instructed  ''  (Lk.  1:4),  he  used  the  word, 
KarrjxriOrj^f  which  means  to  sound  down,  to  resound; 
and  the  thought  is  that  the  instruction  was  re- 
sounded in  the  ears  of  the  pupil,  until  he  had 
learned  the  lesson  by  heart. 

But  the  time  soon  came,  when  churches  became 
multiplied,  and  when  the  apostles  could  no  more 
perform  these  duties  of  teaching.  Catechists  then 
came  in;  and  these  did  just  as  the  apostles  had  done. 
They  repeated  the  lesson  which  they  had  learned. 
Dr.  Arthur  Wright,  who  is  an  earnest  advocate  of 
this  view,  is  of  the  opinion  that  Mark  had  first  been 
a  Chazzan  in  the  synagogue,  and  that  he  then  became 
a  catechist,  continuing  in  the  church  the  exact  work 
which  he  had  formerly  done  in  the  synagogue,  only 
with  altered  lessons.  He  also  believes  that,  when 
Mark  accompanied  Barnabas  and  Paul  on  their  first 
missionary  journey,  he  went  as  their  catechist.  And 
it  is  to  be  noted  that  Luke  uses  the  same  word, 
vTrr)p€Tr)^j  in  referring  to  Mark  in  this  connection 
(Acts  13:5),  which  he  uses  in  referring  to  the 
Chazzan,  "  the  attendant,"  in  the  synagogue  (Lk. 
4:20). 


40  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

'Now  this  oral  gospel  served  the  church  well  for 
some  years.  Dr.  Wright  calls  attention  to  the  fact 
that,  when  Paul  wrote  to  the  Thessalonians,  he 
seemed  to  have  known  of  only  two  kinds  of  instruc- 
tion, this  oral  gospel,  and  his  own  letters  (2  Thess. 
2:2,  15).  And  we  can  readily  understand  why  that 
first  generation  was  satisfied  with  such  a  gospel. 
They  lived  in  the  expectation  of  the  speedy  return 
of  the  Lord,  and  so  long  as  the  eye-witnesses  lived, 
even  so  long  as  they  could  hear  the  story  told  by 
those  who  had  heard  the  words  of  the  Lord  from 
the  lips  of  eye-witnesses,  they  did  not  feel  the  need 
of  a  written  gospel. 

JSTow,  while  the  verbal  accuracy  of  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  may  not  have  been  preserved  in  this  way,  its 
substantial  accuracy  certainly  was.  Peter  was  the 
foremost  of  the  apostles  in  the  early  days  of  the 
church  at  Jerusalem;  as  Papias  tells  us,  Mark  was 
his  interpreter;  and,  if  Mark  was  a  catechist,  as 
there  seems  to  be  little  doubt,  then  we  have  in  his 
record  the  testimony  of  Peter,  and  that  testimony  as 
it  was  given  during  the  very  first  days  of  the  church 
at  Jerusalem.  When  Mark  gives  us  what  he  recol- 
lected of  the  teaching  of  Peter,  he  gives  us  recollec- 
tions which  are,  not  as  the  recollections  of  a  modern 
student,  who  is  accustomed  to  depend  on  notes  or  on 
the  printed  page,  but  like  those  of  a  student  in  the 
synagogue  school,  whose  only  concern  was  to  commit 
accurately  the  very  words  which  fell  from  the 
teacher's  lips. 


OUR  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION       41 

2.    The  Gospel  According  to  Marh 

Eusebius  has  preserved  from  Papias  the  following 
interesting  account  of  the  origin  of  our  Second  Gos- 
pel. ^'  This  also  the  presbyter  said ;  Mark,  having 
become  the  interpreter  of  Peter,  wrote  down  accu- 
rately, though  not  indeed  in  order,  whatsoever  he 
remembered  of  the  things  said  and  done  by  Christ. 
For  he  neither  heard  the  Lord  nor  followed  him,  but 
afterward,  as  I  said,  he  followed  Peter,  who  adapted 
his  teaching  to  the  needs  of  his  hearers,  but  with  no 
intention  of  giving  a  connected  account  of  the  Lord's 
discourses,  so  that  Mark  committed  no  error  while 
he  thus  wrote  some  things  as  he  remembered  them. 
For  he  was  careful  of  one  thing,  not  to  omit  any  of 
the  things  which  he  had  heard,  and  not  to  state  any 
of  them  falsely"  (E.  H.,  iii.  39). 

Xow,  there  seems  to  be  no  reason  for  questioning 
the  substantial  accuracy  of  this  statement;  and  the 
book  by  Papias  from  which  the  quotation  is  made 
must  have  been  written  during  the  first  half  of  the 
second  century.  Papias,  moreover,  was  an  "  ancient 
man,"  when  he  wrote  it,  and  had  himself  been  "  a 
hearer  of  John  and  a  companion  of  Polycarp."  The 
significance  of  the  statement  for  our  purpose  consists 
in  the  fact  that  it  enables  us  to  connect  the  account 
of  our  Second  Gospel  with  the  primitive  apostolic 
tradition.  Peter  was  the  foremost  of  the  apostles  in 
the  early  days  of  the  church  at  Jerusalem.  Mark 
also  was  at  Jerusalem  during  those  days.     The  sug- 


42  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

gestion  that  Mark  became  a  catechist,  and  that  as 
such  he  taught  what  he  had  learned  from  the  lips 
of  Peter  in  those  early  days  at  Jerusalem,  seems 
probable;  so  that,  in  this  first  of  the  two  main 
sources  which  lies  at  the  basis  of  our  Synoptic  Gos- 
pels, we  have  a  source  on  which  we  can  place  the 
utmost  reliance  as  possessing  substantial  accuracy. 
Whether  the  work  to  which  Papias  refers  was  in  all 
respects  the  same  as  our  present  Mark,  is  a  question 
which  is  still  in  dispute;  but  there  are  many  'New 
Testament  scholars  who  are  of  the  opinion  that  it 
was  the  same,  or  so  nearly  identical  with  it  that 
it  was  practically  the  same. 

JSTow,  it  should  be  noted  that  Mark's  Gospel  con- 
sists for  the  most  part  of  narrative.  About  half 
of  it  is  taken  up  with  narratives  of  the  various 
miracles,  which  Jesus  performed.  It  contains  only 
a  few  of  the  parables;  and  it  is  not  nearly  so  rich 
in  the  words  and  discourses  of  Jesus  as  Matthew  and 
Luke.  Yet  there  are  sayings  in  it  of  inestimable 
value  for  determining  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  But 
probably  its  chief  value,  in  a  study  like  this,  will 
be  found  in  the  general  impression  of  the  life  and 
character  of  Jesus  and  in  the  light  which  the  life 
sheds  on  the  teaching.  Of  the  mere  words  of  Jesus 
we  have  a  richer  store  in  Matthew  and  Luke;  and 
to  estimate  the  value  of  that  store  we  must  turn  to 
the  source  or  sources  which  lie  back  of  the  teaching 
which  is  peculiar  to  them. 

!N'either  the  date  nor  the  place  for  the  composition 


OUR  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION       43 

of  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark  can  be  fixed  with 
certainty.  Indications,  however,  point  to  Rome  as 
the  place,  and  60-70  a.d.  as  the  time.  Possibly  the 
date  may  be  even  earlier  than  60  a.d.  Were  we  to 
accept  the  theory  of  an  Un-Markus,  we  should  have 
to  assign  that  to  a  still  earlier  date. 

3.    The  Q  Source 

A  comparison  of  Mark  with  Matthew  and  Luke  at 
once  reveals  the  fact  that  the  latter  have  much  ma- 
terial in  common  which  Mark  does  not  have  at  all. 
And  striking  as  the  resemblances  between  Matthew 
and  Luke  on  the  one  side  and  Mark  on  the  other 
are  in  the  material  which  the  former  have  drawn 
from  the  latter,  the  similarity  between  Matthew  and 
Luke  in  those  sections,  where  they  have  this  ma- 
terial which  is  not  found  in  Mark,  is  still  more 
striking.  If  there  were  no  other  evidence  than  just 
this  fact,  a  careful  analysis  of  these  sections  would 
suggest  a  second  source,  from  which  this  material 
must  have  been  derived. 

This  second  source  is  now  generally  designated  by 
the  symbol  Q,  which  is  simply  the  initial  letter  for 
Quelle,  the  German  for  source.  Some  critics  have 
identified  Q  with  the  Matthgean  Logia,  though  there 
are  many  who  think  that  we  do  not  have  sufficient 
data  to  warrant  the  identification.  But  even  if  we 
should  agree  that  Q  is  simply  a  mass  of  discourse 


U  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

material,  it  is  almost  certain  that  we  should  have  to 
recognize  the  Logia  as  part  of  it. 

Here  again  Eusebius  has  preserved  an  interesting 
quotation  from  Papias.  "  But  concerning  Matthew 
he  (i.e.,  Papias)  writes  as  follows:  So  then  Matthew 
wrote  the  oracles  in  Hebrew,  and  every  one  inter- 
preted them  as  he  was  able  "  {E.  H.,  iii.  39).  There 
has  been  much  discussion  as  to  the  exact  meaning  of 
the  word  ''  oracles  '^ ;  but  it  is  probable  that  it  refers 
to  a  collection  of  the  sayings  and  discourses  of  Jesus. 
If  that  view  is  correct,  then  the  theory  that  this  col- 
lection is  the  second  of  the  sources  back  of  our  Mat- 
thew and  Luke  would  seem  to  satisfy  the  conditions. 

Into  the  question  as  to  how  Matthew  and  Luke 
each  used  this  source,  we  need  not  here  enter.  Suffice 
it  to  say  that,  either  they  had  the  source  in  a  different 
form,  or  else  that  they  used  the  same  source  each 
in  his  own  way,  as  best  suited  his  purpose.  In  Mat- 
thew, we  find  a  tendency  to  gather  the  sayings  into 
collections,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount ;  while  in  Luke  they  are  given  in  a  more  de- 
tached form,  as  may  also  be  seen  in  the  manner  in 
which  he  distributes  the  material  of  the  Sermon. 
This  last  fact  has  suggested  the  idea  that  Luke  prob- 
ably followed  the  Logia  more  closely. 

The  point  of  interest  for  our  present  study  lies  in 
the  fact  that  there  was  such  a  second  source,  and 
that  we  thus  seem  to  be  able  to  trace  a  part  of  it  at 
least  to  the  apostle  Matthew,  just  as  we  were  able 
to  trace  the  other  source  to  the  apostle  Peter.    Almost 


OUR  SOURCES  OF  INF0R:\IATI0N       45 

the  whole  of  the  Second  Gospel,  and  a  very  large 
portion  of  the  First  and  Third  are  thus  traceable  to 
eye-witnesses. 

This  Q  source  is  now  lost ;  and  it  is  questionable 
whether  we  shall  ever  be  able  to  recover  it.  There 
have  been  attempts  at  a  restoration,  based  on  a  com- 
parison of  the  two  Gospels ;  and  these  attempts  have 
been  made  by  some  of  our  foremost  ItTew  Testament 
scholars.  Yet,  beyond  pointing  out  the  material 
which  must  have  been  derived  from  it,  the  attempts 
have  probably  not  been  successful.^  But  even  what 
has  been  accomplished  is  an  immense  gain;  for  it 
enables  us  to  depend  with  much  confidence  on  certain 
sayings  for  determining  the  teaching  of  Jesus. 
When,  for  instance,  we  find  Matthew  11 :  27 ;  Luke 
10 :  22  in  this  source,  we  have  traced  it  beyond  even 

^  The  proposed  reconstructions  of  Q  have  generally  rested 
on  the  assumption  that  it  contained  only  the  discourse  ma- 
terial common  to  Matthew  and  Luke.  This  theory  has,  how- 
ever, been  challenged.  If  Mark  had  been  lost  and  Q  pre- 
served, we  should  make  a  sorry  mess  of  it,  if  we  should 
attempt  to  reconstruct  Mark  from  the  narrative  material 
common  to  Matthew  and  Luke;  for  we  know  that  about 
seven  per  cent  of  Mark  has  not  been  taken  up  by  either,  and 
that  Matthew  has  taken  up  considerable  material  which  Luke 
does  not  have  at  all,  and  vice  versa.  The  same  is  likely  true 
of  Q.  Archdeacon  Allen  has  maintained,  and  we  believe 
rightly,  that  Q  contained  much  more  than  the  discourse  ma- 
terial common  to  Matthew  and  Luke.  In  his  recent  Intro- 
duction to  the  Books  of  the  Sew  Testament,  he  says:  "This 
source  (i.e.,  Q)  is  generally  constructed  by  putting  together 
the  material  common  to  Matthew  and  Luke.  It  may  be 
doubted,    however,    whether    the    document    so    reached    gives 


46  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

our  evangelists;  and  we  can  be  as  certain  that,  at 
least  in  substance,  it  came  from  the  lips  of  Jesus, 
as  we  can  be  of  any  thing  in  ISTew  Testament 
criticism. 

As  to  the  date  when  Q  was  written,  ws  are  left 
almost  entirely  to  conjecture;  and  the  opinions  of 
scholars  have  differed.  Professor  Ramsay  thinks  it 
was  written  while  Christ  was  still  living.  ^^  It  gives 
us  the  view  which  one  of  his  disciples  entertained 
of  him  and  his  teaching  during  his  lifetime."  And 
with  this  Dr.  Salmon  seems  to  agree.  But  that  is 
not  the  view  generally  accepted.  It  must,  however, 
have  been  written  some  time  before  the  year  70  a.d.  ; 
whether  before  Mark  or  after,  we  can  not  be  abso- 
lutely certain,  though  the  probability  is  that  it  is 
earlier.  That  it  embodies  the  testimony  of  an  eye- 
witness there  seems  to  be  no  reason  for  doubting. 

us  an  adequate  idea  of  the  real  Q.  For  it  is  quite  unlikely 
that  Matthew  and  Luke  both  incorporated  the  whole  of  it. 
Both  of  them  have  probably  omitted  some  portions  of  it. 
That,  if  true,  means  that  we  ought  to  put  into  it  sayings  that 
occur  only  in  Matthew  or  only  in  Luke,  and  that  it  may  have 
contained  much  that  has  been  omitted  from  both  Gospels. 
The  present  writer  believes  that  the  source  is  most  truly 
represented  in  Matthew,  and  that  we  reach  a  true  conception 
of  its  character  by  placing  in  it  the  material  common  to 
Matthew  and  Luke,  and  also  most  of  the  discourse  material 
peculiar  to  Matthew.  In  this  way  we  can  build  up  a  source 
with  several  marked  features.  He  believes,  further,  that 
Luke  used  the  document,  not  directly,  but  indirectly,  when 
its  material  had  been  dispersed  and  incorporated  into  other 
evangelical  books"    (pp.  5,  6). 


OUR  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION       47 

4.    Other  Sources 

After  we  have  traced  all  the  material  in  Matthew 
and  Luke  to  these  two  sources,  which  can  be  thus 
traced,  there  remain  considerable  portions  of  both 
Gospels  unaccounted  for.  Matthew  has  forty-two 
per  cent  of  peculiarities,  and  Luke  fifty-nine  per 
cent,  as  over  against  seven  per  cent  in  Mark.  How 
are  these  sections  to  be  accounted  for? 

There  are  portions  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
some  parables,  notably  those  of  the  Tares,  the  Ten 
Virgins,  and  the  Talents,  the  sayings  concerning  the 
church  in  16  :  17-19  ;  18  :  16-20,  some  of  the  instruc- 
tion given  to  the  Twelve,  and  the  gracious  invita- 
tion at  the  close  of  the  eleventh  chapter,  which  are 
found  only  in  the  First  Gospel.  Where  did  the 
author  of  the  Gospel  get  those  sayings?  Arch- 
deacon Allen,  in  his  recent  commentary  on  Matthew 
in  the  International  Critical  series,  refers  them  to 
the  Logia.  A  number  of  the  remaining  peculiarities, 
he  refers  to  Palestinian  tradition,  and  to  unknown 
sources.  Some  are  quotations  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  others  are  editorial  passages,  by  which 
the  author  connects  what  he  has  taken  from  his  vari- 
ous sources.  Clearly  those  which  come  from  a  float- 
ing tradition  and  from  unknown  sources  will  have  to 
be  received  with  more  caution  than  those  whose 
apostolic  authorship  we  can  trace. 

"When  we  turn  to  Luke  we  find  a  still  larger  per- 
centage of  peculiarities.     Chaps.    9 :  51-18 :  14  are 


48  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

often  spoken  ®f  as  the  Perean  section;  and  while 
much  of  the  material  in  it  is  given  in  Matthew  in  a 
different  connection,  it  contains  much  that  is  peculiar 
to  Luke.  Some  of  the  most  beautiful  of  our  Lord's 
parables  are  found  here,  such  as  the  Good  Samaritan 
and  the  Prodigal  Son.  A  number  of  the  most  strik- 
ing sayings  attributed  to  the  Risen  Christ  are  also 
found  in  Luke.  In  what  light  are  we  to  view  the 
sayings  of  the  Lord  which  come  to  us  from  these 
sections  ? 

Luke  has  fortunately  given  us  a  hint  as  to  his 
method;  and  we  know  something  of  the  opportuni- 
ties which  he  had  for  gaining  correct  information. 
He  himself  refers  to  many  who  had  before  him  un- 
dertaken to  draw  up  narratives,  and  he  refers  to  eye- 
witnesses as  the  sources  from  whom  he  had  drawn 
(1:1-4).  We  know  also  that  he  was  with  Paul, 
when  the  latter  came  to  Jerusalem,  immediately 
before  his  arrest  (Acts  21: 15)  ;  and  we  know  that 
he  was  with  him  again,  when  he  started  on  that  mem- 
orable voyage  to  Rome  two  years  later  (Acts  27:1). 
We  do  not  have  any  definite  information  as  to  his 
whereabouts  during  the  two  years  that  intervened; 
but  it  is  a  reasonable  conjecture  that  he  was  with 
Paul  at  Csesarea,  or  at  least  within  easy  reach  of 
him,  so  that  he  had  ample  opportunity  for  thorough 
investigation.  At  Csesarea  he  was  the  guest  for  some 
days  of  the  evangelist  Philip  and  his  four  daughters 
(Acts  21:  8,  9),  who  had  been  at  Jerusalem  during 
th«e  period  immediately  following  the  Ascension,  and 


OUR  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION       49 

were  presumably  also  in  Palestine  during  the  public 
ministry  of  Jesus.  In  the  case  of  any  other  his- 
torian, who  had  similar  opportunities  for  studying 
his  subject,  we  should  be  disposed  to  give  the  utmost 
credence  to  what  he  says;  and  in  the  case  of  Luke, 
who  has  been  found  an  accurate  historian  in  other 
respects,  we  should  be  willing  to  accept  his  state- 
ments, unless  contrary  evidence  should  compel  us 
to  believe  him  to  have  made  mistakes.  On  the  basis 
of  his  statement  in  1 : 1-2,  we  may  assume  that  the 
sayings  of  Jesus  reported  in  his  Perean  section  rest 
upon  the  testimony  of  eye-witnesses  as  well  as  those 
which  are  found  in  Mark  and  in  the  Matthaean 
Logia, 

5.    The  Personal  Equation 

After  the  careful  student  of  the  Synoptic  teaching 
of  Jesus  has  analyzed  the  Gospels,  traced  the  dif- 
ferent sayings  of  Jesus  to  the  sources  through  which 
they  have  been  transmitted,  and  estimated  the  value 
of  these  sources,  he  must  give  attention  to  the  per- 
sonality of  the  evangelists,  the  angle  from  which 
they  viewed  the  teaching  of  the  Lord,  and  the  motive 
which  prompted  them  in  writing.  It  is  evident  that 
none  of  them  wrote  in  the  spirit  of  an  annalist, 
whose  sole  motive  is  to  record  facts,  and  whose  task 
is  done  when  he  has  recorded  the  facts  accurately. 
The  evangelists  wrote  for  edification.  They  were 
all  filled  with  enthusiasm  for  their  subject.     They 


50  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

believed  Jesus  to  be  the  Messiah;  and  they  felt  con- 
fident that  they  had  found  in  him  both  life  and 
peace.  And  their  concern  was  so  to  present  the 
facts,  which  they  recorded,  that  the  same  faith  might 
be  produced  in  those  whom  they  addressed.  They, 
moreover,  addressed  different  audiences,  who  had 
variant  needs,  and  who  needed  the  story  told  in  a 
particular  way.  The  question,  therefore,  arises.  To 
what  extent  is  the  message  of  Jesus  coloured  by  the. 
medium  through  which  it  has  passed  ?  To  answer 
the  question  we  must  inquire  especially  into  the 
motive  which  prompted  each  evangelist. 

It  is  now  generally  conceded  that  the  author  of 
our  First  Gospel  was  a  Jew,  that  he  wrote  for  Jews, 
and  that  they  were  probably  Palestinian  Jews.  His 
aim  was  to  show  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  foretold 
by  the  prophets,  rejected  by  the  Jews,  but  vindicated 
by  God  through  the  resurrection  from  the  dead.  He 
aimed  to  prove  that  Jesus  was  the  founder  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  which,  having  been  rejected  by 
the  Jews,  has  now  become  a  universal  kingdom,  for 
all  men.  Gentiles  as  well  as  Jews.  There  is  an 
apologetic  strain  running  through  the  entire  Gospel. 
The  author  sympathized  with  the  disappointment  of 
the  ordinary  Jew  in  the  fact  that  Jesus  was  a  Mes- 
siah of  a  different  kind  from  what  had  been  gen- 
erally expected;  but,  like  the  rest  of  the  Christians 
of  that  generation,  he  comforted  himself  with  the 
thought  that  the  Lord  would  speedily  return,  and 
that  he  would  then  set  up  the  kingdom  in  outward 


OUR  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION       51 

visible  form,  for  which  the  Jews  had  all  been  look- 
ing. Hence  he  had  a  predilection  for  the  eschata- 
logical  teaching  of  the  Lord;  and  we  need  not  be 
surprised  to  find  him  emphasizing  that  teaching. 
When  we  find  that  he  has  changed  the  statement  in 
Mark  9:1,  "  Verily,  I  say  unto  yon,  there  are  some 
here  of  them  that  stand  by,  who  shall  not  taste  of 
death,  till  they  see  the  Kingdom  of  God  come  with 
power''  into  ^'  Verily  I  say  nnto  you,  there  are  some 
that  stand  here,  who  shall  not  taste  of  death,  till 
they  see  the  Son  of  man  comdng  in  his  kingdom  " 
(16:28),  we  have  no  diflSculty  in  explaining  the 
variation  by  the  personal  equation  of  the  first  evan- 
gelist. (See  also  Mk.  13  :  4-Mt.  24 :  3).  He  viewed 
the  whole  gospel  from  his  own  peculiar  angle;  his 
view-point  was  Jewish ;  he  lacked  the  comprehensive- 
ness of  view  which  Jesus  had;  and  hence  he  pre- 
sented the  teaching  of  Jesus  with  a  bias.  He  could 
think  of  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  of  God  with 
power  only  by  thinking  of  the  coming  of  the  Son 
of  man  on  the  clouds  of  heaven,  surrounded  by  the 
holy  angels,  and  for  the  purpose  of  setting  up  an 
outward  visible  kingdom  upon  earth. 

In  the  case  of  the  Second  Gospel  we  find  it  some- 
what more  difficult  to  ascertain  the  motive  with  which 
the  author  wrote.  It  is  probable  that  Mark  wrote  at 
Rome,  and  for  Romans.  We  can  be  sure,  at  least, 
that  he  wrote  for  Gentile  readers,  not  for  Jews,  as 
the  author  of  the  First  Gospel  did.  Hence  we  find 
the  absence  of  many  things  found  in  the  First  Gospel. 


52  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

Aside  from  the  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament 
found  in  the  words  of  Jesus,  there  is  but  one  such 
quotation  in  the  entire  Gospel.  So  we  find  that  that 
Jewish  view-point,  which  we  detected  in  Matthew, 
is  likewise  lacking.  Mark  is  concerned  with  telling 
the  story  of  the  public  ministry  of  Jesus.  As  Peter, 
whose  teaching  he  records,  was  especially  impressed 
with  our  Lord's  deeds  of  power  (Lk.  5:8),  so  it 
seems  to  have  been  with  Mark.  What  Jesus  did 
convinced  him  that  he  was  the  Messiah;  and  he 
seems  to  have  gone  on  the  assumption  that  others 
would  be  similarly  impressed.  Hence  he  tells  the 
story  of  the  public  ministry,  and  especially  the 
deeds  of  power,  which  characterized  it;  and  tells  it 
in  a  simple,  straightforward  manner.  Aside  from 
his  predilection  for  the  deeds  of  power,  it  is  difficult 
to  detect  a  personal  bias  in  his  narrative.  There  is 
an  a  priori  reason  for  saying  that,  where  either  Mat- 
thew or  Luke  differ  from  Mark,  we  have  in  Mark  the 
better  authority;  for  did  not  the  others  use  him  as 
a  source?  But  beyond  that,  the  fact  that  he  tells 
a  straightforward  story,  without  argumentative  pur- 
pose or  bent,  would  seem  to  indicate  that,  other  things 
being  equal,  we  are  safe  in  placing  our  reliance  on 
him. 

Luke  has  prefaced  his  Gospel  with  a  statement 
of  the  purpose  with  which  he  wrote.  It  was  that 
his  friend  Theophilus  might  know  the  certainty  con- 
cerning the  things  wherein  he  was  instructed  (Lk. 
1 : 1-4) .     His  motive  was  more  nearly  that  of  the 


OUR  SOURCES  OP  INFORMATION   53 

historian,  namely,  to  record  the  facts  after  careful 
investigation.  But  he  was  unable  to  divest  himself 
of  his  personality  and  of  his  previous  position  and 
training.  He  was  himself  a  Greek,  and  a  physician. 
He  had  much  sympathy  with  suffering  humanity. 
He  felt  the  brotherhood  of  man,  as  neither  of  the 
other  evangelists  did.  He  traces  the  descent  of 
Jesus  from  Adam,  revealing  his  universalistic  tend- 
ency. He  had  been  a  companion  of  Paul;  and  he 
was  much  influenced  by  PauFs  passion  for  human- 
ity, and  for  bringing  the  gospel  to  all  men.  Hence 
we  find  in  him  an  open  ear  to  all  the  social  teaching 
of  Jesus.  He  has  sympathy  with  the  poor,  and  he 
feels  the  danger  of  wealth.  Hence  we  are  not  sur- 
prised to  find  him  give  the  first  of  the  beatitudes 
in  this  form,  "  Blessed  are  ye  poor,"  and  to  set 
opposite  to  it  this,  "  But  woe  unto  you  that  are 
rich." 

All  this,  now,  means  that  Jesus  was  larger  than 
any  of  his  disciples,  and  his  teaching  more  pro- 
found than  that  of  any  of  the  evangelists.  Each  of 
them  caught  one  aspect  of  his  many-sided  glory. 
Instead  of  one,  we  have  four  different  portraits, 
painted  by  four  different  artists;  and  the  church 
is  richer,  because  she  has  the  four  different  interpre- 
tations of  his  life.  Instead  of  stumbling  at  the  facts, 
we  can  only  wonder  at  that  perfect  wisdom  of  Provi- 
dence which  has  given  us,  not  a  single,  but  a  four- 
fold Gospel. 


54i  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

6.    The  Ipsissima  Verba  of  Jesus 

We  have  already  referred  to  the  fact  that  Jesus 
wrote  nothing.  He  intrusted  his  teaching  to  the 
keeping  of  loving  hearts;  and  the  world  is  entirely 
dependent  on  them  for  its  knowledge  of  what  he 
taught.  All  we  know  of  his  teaching  we  get  from 
them ;  and  we  have  it  in  each  case  through  an  inter- 
pretation; for  the  disciples  could  only  report  him 
as  they  understood  him.  There  is,  indeed,  evidence 
that  they  have  here  and  there  reported  sayings  whose 
full  import  they  had  not  understood;  but  generally 
we  have  his  words  in  the  form  in  which  they  under- 
stood him.  In  other  words,  we  have  the  teaching 
of  Jesus  through  an  interpretation — the  interpre- 
tation given  to  it  by  the  minds,  the  hearts,  the  ex- 
periences, and  the  lives  of  those  into  whose  hearts 
he  first  wrote  his  message. 

It  is  sometimes  objected  to  the  Fourth  Gospel 
that  the  discourses,  which  are  there  attributed  to 
Jesus,  are  in  the  style  of  the  evangelist;  and  it  is 
now  pretty  generally  agreed  among  'New  Testament 
scholars  that  they  give  us  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  not 
in  his  exact  words,  but  in  those  of  the  evangelist. 
It  all  passed  through  the  melting-pot  of  the  evan- 
gelist's mind  and  heart ;  and  we  have  it  through 
an  interpretation, — the  interpretation  given  to  it  by 
the  thought  and  the  experience  of  the  beloved  dis- 
ciple. Something  of  the  same  kind  must  be  ad- 
mitted in  the  case  of  the  Synoptic  teaching. 


OUR  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION       55 

That,  however,  brings  us  face  to  face  with  a  very 
serious  question.  Do  we  have  the  very  words  which 
Jesus  uttered  ?  Much  of  his  teaching  was  in  the  form 
of  brief,  pithy  sayings,  many  of  which  were,  no 
doubt,  frequently  repeated.  They  were,  moreover, 
put  into  such  concrete  form  that  a  number  of  them 
were  indelibly  impressed  on  the  minds  of  his  dis- 
ciples; and  thus  many  were  probably  preserved  in 
their  original  form.  But  even  then,  it  must  be  re- 
membered that  he  spoke  in  Aramaic,  while  the  Gos- 
pels were  written  in  Greek.  We  hence,  at  best,  have 
them  in  a  translation;  and  every  translator  becomes 
also  at  once  an  interpreter.  In  every  process  of 
translation,  there  is  the  possibility  of  expansion  and 
contraction,  and  of  a  modification  of  the  shades  of 
meaning  in  an  expression.  These  possibilities  be- 
come greater  where  the  teaching  is  first  of  all  oral 
and  transmitted  through  a  number  of  years  by  word 
of  mouth.  Hence  we  are  not  surprised  at  the  fact 
that  in  so  many  cases  the  same  sayings  of  Jesus  are 
reported  differently  by  the  different  evangelists. 

It  may  at  first  sight  seem  almost  irreverent  to  ask 
whether  Jesus  acted  wisely,  when  he  committed  his 
teaching  to  the  loving  hearts  of  his  disciples,  instead 
of  committing  it  to  writing;  and  yet  the  question 
can  not  be  avoided.  If  his  is  the  supreme  revela- 
tion, as  we  believe,  how  much  better  it  would  have 
been,  one  is  tempted  to  exclaim,  if  we  had  his  words 
in  clear,  unmistakable  form;  so  that  no  one  could 
ever  be  mistaken  or  in  doubt  as  to  what  he  really 


561  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

did  say !  Yes ;  if  his  religion  had  been  a  religion  of 
authority,  in  which  men's  salvation  depended  on  the 
form  of  words  in  which  they  make  their  profession; 
but  not,  if  it  is  first  of  all  a  religion  of  the  spirit, 
and  if  men's  salvation  depends  not  primarily  on  doc- 
trine, but  on  life.  According  to  the  teaching  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  Jesus  assured  the  disciples  that  it 
was  expedient  for  them  that  he  should  go  away; 
because  that  was  the  only  condition  on  which  it  was 
possible  for  the  Holy  Spirit  to  come  (Jn.  16:7). 
What  they  needed  was  that  they  should  be  guided, 
not  by  an  external  hand  or  by  external  authority, 
but  by  an  inner  light,  by  means  of  which  each  of 
them  should  become  a  law  unto  himself, — by  the  law 
written  in  his  heart,  not  by  its  precepts  written  over 
against  him  in  external  commands.  But  that  im- 
plied that  each  should  learn  to  know  the  truth 
through  the  inner  testimony  of  the  Spirit.  Hence 
the  important  thing  was  that  Jesus  should  impress 
himself,  that  he  should  allow  his  life  and  his  per- 
sonality to  speak,  and  that  his  disciples  should  learn 
to  interpret  his  words  on  that  background.  Words 
are  at  best  only  symbols,  into  which  the  teacher  must 
first  of  all  translate  his  thought;  and  before  the 
pupil  can  understand  their  meaning,  he  must  trans- 
late them  back  into  the  teacher's  thought.  And  that 
can  be  accomplished  only  where  there  is  such  a  com- 
munity of  life  between  teacher  and  pupil  that  the 
latter  has  come  to  have  fellowship  with  the  spirit 
of  the  former.     Hence  more  important  than  the 


OUR  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION   57 

exact  words  are  his  life  and  spirit;  and  where  the 
pupils  have  entered  into  that  life-fellowship  with 
the  teacher,  it  matters  little  whether  thej  remember 
his  exact  words.  They  have  something  deeper  and 
better,  which  enables  them  to  reproduce  the  teaching 
of  the  master.  Something  like  this,  we  think,  must 
be  said  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  He  lived  with  his 
disciples  until  he,  by  his  words  and  acts,  had  im- 
pressed his  personality  and  Spirit  on  them;  and 
after  that  had  been  accomplished  (and  it  was  the 
greater  and  more  difficult  task),  he  could  safely  trust 
them  to  reproduce  and  interpret  his  teaching  to  the 
world. 

But  all  that  does  not  free  the  student  from  the 
necessity  of  examining  into  the  credibility  of  the 
words  which  are  attributed  to  Jesus.  On  the  con- 
trary, it  makes  such  an  examination  all  the  more 
imperative.  But  in  the  examination  it  is  always 
necessary  to  remember  that  the  words  must  ulti- 
mately be  interpreted  on  the  background  of  his  life. 

7.    TTie  Doubly  Attested  Sayings  of  Jesus 

Above  we  referred  to  what  has  often  been  called 
the  triple  tradition;  and  we  remarked  that,  since 
Matthew  and  Luke  in  their  narrative  portions  both 
used  Mark,  they  are  all  dependent  on  the  same 
source,  and  that  consequently  the  sayings  of  Jesus 
thus  reported  have,  not  a  threefold,  but  only  a  single 
attestation,   that  namely  of  the  source  which  lies 


58  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

back  of  them  all.  They  do  not  possess  the  authority 
of  three  independent  witnesses,  but  of  the  one  source. 
And  yet  one  thing  more  needs  to  be  said.  The  first 
and  third  evangelist  each  lived  in  a  time  when  the 
oral  tradition  was  still  alive,  and  when  they  had  the 
opportunity  of  testing  the  report,  contained  in  Mark, 
as  we  can  not  do  now.  Luke  claims  to  have  ''  traced 
all  things  accurately  from  the  beginning''  (Lk. 
1:3);  and  we  have  reasons,  gathered  from  other 
sources,  for  believing  that  he  was  a  reasonably  pains- 
taking and  accurate  historian.  Hence  we  may  add 
that,  while  these  sayings  in  this  so-called  triple 
tradition  do  all  of  them  rest  on  a  single  source,  they 
have  the  endorsement  of  the  first  and  third  evan- 
gelists, in  addition  to  the  authority  of  that  single 
source. 

But  if  we  may  not  speak  of  a  triple  tradition, 
there  is  a  double  tradition  which  later  study  has 
brought  to  light;  and  of  the  sayings  contained  in 
this  we  may  say  that  they  contain  a  double  attesta- 
tion. Such  sayings  are  those  which  have  been  trans- 
mitted through  both  Mark  and  Q  or  one  of  the  other 
sources.  At  first  sight,  one  might  be  disposed  to 
say  that,  like  those  referred  to  above,  they  all  come 
from  the  common  source  in  Mark;  but  when  it  is 
observed  that  Mark  has  them  in  one  connection, 
which  is  itself  paralleled  in  Matthew  or  Luke  or 
in  both,  and  that  either  Matthew  or  Luke  or  both 
have  them  also  in  a  different  connection,  it  becomes 
apparent  that  they  come  to  us  through  two  streams 


Oim  SOURCES  OF  INFORMATION       59 

of  tradition.  Take  for  example  the  saying  in  Mark 
3:4,  ^'  And  lie  saith  unto  them,  Is  it  lawful  on  the 
sabbath  day  to  do  good,  or  to  do  harm?  to  save  a 
life,  or  to  kill  ?  "  This  is  reproduced  in  Luke  6 ;  9  in 
the  same  connection,  that  is,  the  healing  of  the  man 
with  the  withered  hand.  But  Luke  gives  us  substan- 
tially the  same  saying  again  in  14 :  5,  6,  in  connec- 
tion with  the  healing  of  the  man  with  the  dropsy. 
The  former  cure  was  wrought  in  the  synagogue  and 
near  the  beginning  of  the  Galilean  ministry;  the 
latter  took  place  in  the  house  of  one  of  the  rulers  of 
the  Pharisees,  and  apparently  near  the  close  of  the 
ministry.  It  will  not  do  to  say  that  they  are  simply 
confused  accounts  of  one  and  the  same  cure;  for 
Jesus  performed  many  cures,  and  he  doubtless  re- 
peated many  of  his  sayings  often  in  different  con- 
nections. Where  this  saying  comes  to  us  in  the  one 
connection,  it  is  from  the  source  which  lies  back  of 
Mark;  where  we  find  it  the  second  time,  it  comes 
to  us  through  one  of  the  other  sources,  which  Luke 
used. 

Professor  F.  C.  Burkitt,  in  his  recent  book  on  the 
Gospel  History  and  Its  Transmission,  has  collected 
thirty-one  such  doubly  attested  sayings.     This  is  his 
list:  Mk.  3:4  =  Lk.  14:5,  6;  Mk.  3 :  22-26  =  Lk. 
11 :  15-18 ;  Mk.  3 :  27  =  Lk.  11 :  21-23 ;  Mk.  3 :  28- 
30  =  Lk.    12:10;   Mk.    3:31-34  =  Lk.    11:27-28 
Mk.  4:  3-9  =  Lk.  8 :  5  ff. ;  Mk.  4:  21  =  Lk.  11 :  33 
Mk.  4:22  =  Lk.  12 :  2  ff. ;  Mk.  4:23  =  Lk.  14:35 
Mk.   4:24  =  Lk.   6:38;  Mk.  4:25  =  Lk.   19:26 


60         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

Mt.  4:30-32  =  Lk.  13:18,  19;  Mk.  6:4  =  Lk. 
4:24;  Mk.  6:10,  11  =  Lk.  10:5,  7,  10,  11;  Mk. 
8 :  12  f.  =  Lk.  11:29;  Mk.  8 :  15  =  Lk.  12  : 1 ;  Mk. 
8:34  =  Lk.  14:25-27;  Mk.  9:42  =  Lk.  17:2; 
Mk.  9  :  43-48  —  Mt.  5  :  29,  30 ;  Mk.  9  :  50  =  Lk. 
14:34;  Mk.  10:11,  12  =  Lk.  16:18;  Mk.  10:42- 
45=:Lk.  22:25-27;  Mk.  11:22,  23  =  Lk.  17:6; 
Mk.  11 :  24  =  Lk.  11:9;  Mk.  11 :  25  ==  Mt.  6  :  14, 
15;  Mk.  12 :  32-34a  =  Lk.  10:25-28;  Mk.  12:38, 
39  ==  Lk.  11 :  43 ;  Mk.  13 :  11  =  Lk.  12 :  11,  12 ; 
Mk.  13  :  15,  16  =  Lk.  17  :  31 ;  Mk.  13 :  21  =  Lk. 
17:23;  ]\Ik.  13:34,  35  =  Lk.  12:37,  38. 

Alongside  of  these  may  be  placed  another  double 
attestation  of  very  great  importance.  In  Matthew 
11:27  =  Luke  10 :  22,  we  have  ''  the  Father  "  and 
"  the  Son  "  placed  in  such  correlation  as  to  imply  an 
altogether  unique  relation.  As  we  saw  above  this 
comes  from  the  Q  source.  The  same  thing  occurs 
in  Mark  13 :  32,  but  in  an  entirely  different  connec- 
tion. This,  moreover,  comes  to  us  through  the  Pe- 
trine  tradition,  making  it  thus  doubly  sure  that  Jesus 
must  have  used  such  an  expression,  and  that  he  must 
have  claimed  to  stand  in  such  a  unique  relation  to 
the  Eather.  As  we  shall  see,  when  we  come  to  study 
what  Jesus  thought  and  taught  concerning  himself, 
this  is  very  important. 


in 

JESUS  AND   THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

TBLiT  Jesus  was  truly  and  fully  man  is  a  truth 
which,  in  a  study  like  this,  we  can  not  guard 
too  jealously.  His  life  conformed  to  all  the 
true  and  legitimate  laws  of  our  human  life.  He  was 
a  child  of  his  own  age  and  nation;  and  he  shared 
in  all  the  pious  hopes  and  aspirations  of  his  people. 
The  God  whom  he  worshipped  was  the  God  who  in 
times  past  had  spoken  unto  the  fathers  through  the 
prophets.  His  revelation,  unique  and  glorious  as  it 
is,  has  throughout  an  Old  Testament  hasis.  So  of 
the  morality  which  he  taught.  The  roots  of  his 
teaching  can  in  nearly  all  cases  be  traced  to  the 
Scriptures  which  he  had  learned  at  his  mother's 
knee,  and  which  he  had  heard  and  studied  in  the 
synagogue.  Unless  we  remember  this,  we  shall 
likely  fail  to  grasp  the  uniqueness  and  the  originality 
of  his  teaching,  when  we  come  to  study  those  aspects 
of  it  in  which  its  transcendence  especially  appears. 

1.    His  Use  of  the  Old  Testament 

There  is  abundant  evidence  that  Jesus,  like  his 
contemporaries,  looked  upon  the  Old  Testament  a'b 

61 


62  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

Scripture,  and  as  being  in  an  especial  sense  con- 
nected with  the  revelation  which  God  had  made  of 
himself  to  his  people.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  he 
says  nothing  on  the  subject  of  inspiration;  and  he 
has  not  stopped  to  tell  us  just  how  God  spake 
through  the  prophets.  He  was  neither  a  theologian 
nor  a  philosopher,  and  he  does  not  give  definitions 
nor  propound  theories;  if  we  would  know  how  he 
looked  upon  the  Scriptures,  we  must  approach  the 
subject  from  the  standpoint  of  the  use  which  he 
made  of  them. 

We  would  probably  be  quite  safe  in  saying  that 
he  used  the  Old  Testament  for  purposes  of  study 
and  edification;  for  the  freedom  with  which  he 
quotes  it  bears  testimony  to  that  fact.  He  knew  the 
Scriptures ;  otherwise  it  would  be  difiicult  to  explain 
the  astonishment  of  the  Jews  at  his  teaching  (Mk. 
6:2,  3;  Jn.  7:  15),  for  the  body  of  the  teaching  in 
their  schools  was  the  Old  Testament  and  its  explana- 
tion. From  it  he  drew  precepts  for  his  own  and 
others'  guidance  (Mt.  9  :  13)  ;  in  it  he  found  weapons 
of  defence,  when  he  was  assailed  by  temptation  (Mt. 
4:4,  7,  10),  or  by  his  enemies  (Mt.  22:41-46); 
and  in  it  he  likewise  found  a  basis  for  some  of 
his  profoundest  teaching  (Mk.  7:6,  7).  He  not 
only  read  the  Scriptures  in  the  synagog-ue  for 
his  own  and  others'  edification,  but  he  made  the 
passage  which  he  had  just  read  the  basis  for  his 
address   (Lk.  4:17-21).     He  even  quoted  the  pre- 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  63 

cepts  of  the  law  as  a  foil  to  set  off  and  enhance  tlie 
beauty  and  the  superiority  of  his  own  doctrine 
(Mt.  5:21-47). 

The  quotations  of  Jesus  form  a  very  interesting 
study.  Men  usually  quote  those  books,  and  those 
passages  which  have  impressed  them  and  made  an 
especially  strong  appeal  to  their  sense  of  truth  and 
reality.  This  is  above  all  else  true  of  quotations 
from  Holy  Writ.  A  passage  on  which  the  heart  has 
long  fed,  and  which  has  been  a  source  of  comfort  and 
inspiration  in  the  hour  of  trial  and  temptation,  is 
apt  to  rise  to  the  lips  when  we  quote.  The  same 
was  true  of  Jesus.  He  had  his  favourite  books,  on 
which  his  soul  seems  to  have  fed ;  and  in  those  books 
he  found  the  passages  which  most  frequently  suited 
his  purposes.  By  noting  which  books  he  thus 
quoted,  and  by  studying  the  passages  which  came  to 
his  lips  in  his  temptation,  during  his  controversies, 
and  upon  the  cross,  we  gain,  not  simply  a  glimpse 
into  the  working  of  his  inner  consciousness,  but 
often  also  an  insight  into  his  own  estimate  of  those 
Scriptures  themselves. 

Professor  James  Stalker  says,  "  If  his  quotations 
are  examined,  it  will  be  found  that  they  are  derived 
from  every  part  of  the  book,  showing  his  acquaint- 
ance not  only  with  its  prominent  features,  but  with 
its  obscurest  comers."  ^  Considering  the  many  al- 
lusions to  Old  Testament  events  and  personages  and 
the  quotations  which  are  often  so  interwoven  into 

^  Imago  Christi,  p.  154. 


64*  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

the  warp  and  woof  of  his  own  statements  as  to  escape 
the  notice  of  the  casual  reader,  the  statement  is  per- 
haps correct  so  far  as  our  Lord's  knowledge  is  con- 
cerned. So  far,  however,  as  concerns  his  quotations, 
it  is  too  sweeping.  Jesus  had  his  favourite  books  in 
the  Old  Testament ;  and  there  are  books  from  which 
there  are  no  direct  quotations.  There  are,  moreover, 
customs  to  w^hich  there  is  no  allusion  whatever. 
Thus,  for  example,  there  is  no  mention  of  circum- 
cision in  all  the  Synoptic  teaching.  All  of  which 
shows  that,  while  Jesus  held  the  Old  Testament  in 
high  regard,  he  did  not  esteem  all  its  books  as  of 
equal  value. 

2.    His  Estimate  of  Its  Value 

In  endeavouring  to  appraise  the  value  which  he 
put  on  the  Old  Testament  and  its  several  books,  we 
have  need  constantly  to  keep  in  mind  the  fact  just 
mentioned ;  for  whatever  he  might  have  said  on  the 
modern  doctrine  of  inspiration,  if  it  had  been  pre- 
sented to  him,  it  is  clear  that  he  had  no  sympathy 
with  that  notion,  now  happily  passing,  which  looks 
upon  all  portions  of  the  Bible  as  equally  inspired 
and  hence  of  equal  value.  With  his  quotations  be- 
fore us,  we  can  say  with  much  confidence  that  he 
had  a  predilection  for  Deuteronomy,  Isaiah,  and  the 
Psalms;  but  we  have  no  way  of  telling  what  he 
thought  of  books  like  Ruth,  Esther,  Ecclesiastes,  or 
Lamentations,  except  by  his  silence. 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  65 

Taking  the  Old  Testament  as  a  whole,  we  may  dis- 
tinguish two  main  tendencies,  the  priestly  and  the 
prophetic.  The  one  emphasized  the  legal  and  the 
ceremonial,  the  other  laid  stress  on  the  ethical.  The 
charge  has  been  made  that  the  author  of  the  Priest's 
Code  did  not  attach  any  importance  to  moral  pre- 
cepts. This,  as  Kautzsch  ^  has  pointed  out,  is  doubt- 
less a  mistake ;  yet  it  is  true  that  he  has  emphasized 
the  ritual  ordinances  to  such  an  extent  that  moral 
precepts  have  been  pushed  into  the  backgTound. 
And  in  the  latest  development  of  the  religion  of 
Israel,  there  was  a  growing  tendency  to  emphasize 
the  ritual  and  the  ceremonial  to  the  utter  disregard 
of  the  ethical.  Against  this  the  prophets  protested, 
saying,  '^  I  desire  goodness,  and  not  sacrifice  ''  (Hos. 
6:6),  or  as  Samuel  had  put  it  long  before,  "  Behold, 
to  obey  is  better  than  sacrifice,  and  to  hearken  than 
the  fat  of  rams  "  (1  Sam.  15:  22). 

ISTow,  there  can  be  no  doubt  on  which  side  of  this 
age-long  controversy  the  sympathy  of  Jesus  was. 
The  purely  legalistic  ideal,  which  emphasized  ritual 
and  the  scrupulous  observance  of  ritual  observances, 
had  found  its  highest  expression  in  that  Pharisaism 
with  which  Jesus  came  into  such  deadly  collision; 
and  his  estimate  of  it  may  be  seen,  if  we  carefully 
note  the  several  facts  in  his  controversy  with  the 
scribes  and  Pharisees. 

We  may  distinguish  three  kinds  of  legislation; 

*  Religion  of  Israel,  Hastings  Bible  Dictionary,  Extra  Vol., 
pp.  727  f. 


66  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

and  the  attitude  of  Jesus  differed  according  to  its 
character. 

1)  There  was  much  that  had  simply  symbolic 
value.  It  had  value  for  the  time  being,  in  so  far  as 
it  was  capable  of  pointing  the  people  to  some  spirit- 
ual truth;  but  as  soon  as  the  truth  itself  had 
been  revealed  in  a  higher  and  more  perfect  form, 
it  was  destined  to  pass  away.  All  this  Jesus 
treated  as  indifferent;  and,  where  the  purely 
symbolical  was  lost  in  the  ceremonial,  even  as 
injurious. 

An  illustration  of  this  kind  of  legislation,  and  of 
Jesus'  attitude  with  reference  to  it  may  be  found 
in  an  incident  which  occurred  about  the  time  of  the 
Galilean  crisis.  The  Pharisees  and  certain  of  the 
scribes  who  had  come  from  Jerusalem  saw  the  dis- 
ciples eat  bread  with  defiled,  that  is,  unwashen, 
hands ;  and  they  asked  Jesus,  ^'  Why  walk  not  thy 
disciples  according  to  the  tradition  of  the  elders,  but 
eat  their  bread  with  defiled  hands  ? ''  The  question, 
it  is  true,  has  reference  primarily  to  the  tradition 
of  the  elders,  and  not  to  the  precepts  of  the  written 
law ;  but  it  grows  out  of  that  scrupulous  care  for  rit- 
ual, which  characterized  the  entire  legalistic  tend- 
ency. The  traditions  of  the  elders  were  intended 
to  be  a  hedge  about  the  law,  so  that  its  precepts 
might  be  kept  more  carefully.  And  the  answer  of 
Jesus  shows  his  attitude  towards  that  tendency.  He 
first  of  all  said,  "  Well  did  Isaiah  prophesy  of  you 
hypocrites,  as  it  is  written, 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  67 

This  people  honoureth  me  with  their  lips, 

But  their  heart  is  far  from  me. 

But  in  vain  do  they  worship  me, 

Teaching  as  their  doctrines  the  precepts  of  men. 

Ye  leave  the  commandment  of  God,  and  hold  fast  the 
tradition  of  men.''  Then,  after  pointing  out  how 
they  were  constantly  rejecting  the  commandment  of 
God  through  their  tradition,  he  added,  "  Hear  me 
all  of  you,  and  understand;  there  is  nothing  from 
without  a  man,  that  going  into  him  can  defile  him; 
but  the  things  which  proceed  out  of  the  man  are  those 
that  defile  him."  And,  as  he  afterwards  explained 
to  the  disciples,  the  things  to  which  he  referred  are 
the  things  which  come  out  of  the  heart,  evil  thoughts, 
fornications,  thefts,  murders,  and  such  like  (Mk. 
7: 1-23).  As  is  clearly  implied  by  the  true  text  in 
Mark,  Jesus  by  saying  this  made  all  meats  clean; 
and  he  thus  put  the  stamp  of  disapproval  on  that 
entire  Old  Testament  code  of  laws  which  regulated 
the  difference  between  clean  and  unclean  meats. 

2)  We  may  distinguish  a  second  kind  of  legis- 
lation. This  had  value  in  itself ;  and,  at  the  time  it 
was  given,  it  was  an  advance  on  what  had  existed 
before;  but  in  itself  it  was  imperfect.  It  was  the 
best  that  the  people  were  able  at  the  time  to  receive ; 
but  it  was  far  below  that  which  man  is  able  to  re- 
ceive, when  he  is  at  his  best.  This,  too,  was  destined 
to  pass  away ;  but  only  when  it  had  found  its  fulfil- 
ment in  that  which  is  higher  and  better.  The  law  of 
divorce  and  the  law  of  retaliation  are  examples. 


68  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

Once  the  Pharisees  asked  Jesus,  ^'  Is  it  lawful  for 
a  man  to  put  away  his  wife  ? ''  He  referred  them 
to  the  law  of  Moses;  and  when  thej  affirmed  that 
Moses  had  ''  suffered  to  wTite  a  bill  of  divorcement 
and  to  put  her  away,"  he  pointed  out  that  from  the 
beginning  it  had  not  been  so,  and  that  Moses  had 
allowed  the  divorce  because  of  the  hardness  of  their 
hearts;  and  he  then  immediately  followed  that  with 
the  higher  law,  saying,  ^^  Whosoever  shall  put  away 
his  wife,  and  marry  another,  committeth  adultery 
against  her:  and  if  she  herself  shall  put  away  her 
husband,  and  marry  another,  she  committeth  adul- 
tery" (Mk.  10:1-12).  Plere  Jesus  clearly  implies 
that  a  specific  enactment  of  the  Old  Testament  was 
of  temporary  validity  only,  because  pitched  on  a 
low^r  plane.  It  was  the  best  possible  at  the  time, 
and  vastly  better  than  the  laws  of  the  surrounding 
heathen  nations;  but  it  was  still  an  imperfect  legis- 
lation, which  had  to  give  way  to  something  higher 
and  better,  when  men's  hearts  should  be  prepared  to 
receive  it. 

Another  illustration  of  this  same  attitude  towards 
the  Mosaic  law  is  found  in  what  Jesus  says  on  the 
subject  of  retaliation.  The  old  law  was,  "  An  eye 
for  an  eye,  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth."  It  looks,  at 
first  sight,  like  a  barbarous  regulation;  but  like  the 
law  concerning  divorce,  it  was  given  to  the  people  of 
Israel  because  of  the  hardness  of  their  hearts.  It 
was  in  reality  a  great  advance  on  the  law  which  was 
universally  recognized   in  the   Orient  at  the  time, 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  69 

when  it  was  promulgated;  for,  according  to  that,  a 
man  who  w^as  injured  was  permitted  to  take 
vengeance  upon  his  enemy  to  the  fullest  extent  possi- 
ble. But  the  law  of  Moses  stepped  in  as  a  policeman, 
and  regulated  and  limited  the  revenge  which  a  man 
might  take.  Has  an  eye  been  injured?  then  you 
may  exact  an  eye  in  return.  Has  a  tooth  been 
knocked  out?  then  you  may  demand  a  tooth  in 
return.  But  you  must  stop  with  that.  Your  re- 
venge must  not  go  beyond  the  injury  which  has  been 
inflicted.  It  was  a  beneficent  limitation  of  the  old 
law  of  retaliation  w^hich  had  prevailed  round  the 
children  of  Israel  on  all  sides;  but  it  was  notwith- 
standing a  very  imperfect  law.  Jesus  recognized 
that  fact,  and  proclaimed  its  limited  and  temporary 
character,  when  he  added,  '^  But  I  say  unto  you,  Ee- 
sist  not  him  that  is  evil :  but  whosoever  smiteth  thee 
on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the  other  also " 
(Mt.  5:38,  39). 

3)  And  there  was  still  another  and  higher  kind 
of  legislation,  which  was  right  and  good  in  itself; 
but  much  of  it  had  been  misunderstood  by  the  Jews, 
and  overlaid  by  ritual  regulations,  so  that,  instead 
of  being  a  boon,  it  had  become  a  burden.  With 
reference  to  this,  Jesus  broke  through  the  regula- 
tions, which  had  come  to  hide  the  beneficent  pur- 
pose; and  he  placed  all  on  a  higher  plane  by  point' 
ing  out  that  obedience  to  it  consists,  not  in  conform- 
ity to  the  outward  letter,  but  in  the  cultivation  of  its 


70  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

animating  spirit.     An  illustration  may  be  found  in 
his  teaching  on  the  sabbath. 

In  the  sabbath  controversy  we  find  a  hint  as  to 
the  estimate  which  Jesus  put  on  the  Decalogue.  As 
is  well  known,  among  the  subjects  on  which  the 
Jews  found  fault  with  him  was  tb-  manner  in  which 
he  and  his  disciples  broke  through  the  traditions  of 
the  elders  with  reference  to  the  observance  of  this 
day.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  Jesus  made  no  attempt 
to  abrogate  the  sabbath,  just  as  he  made  no  attempt 
to  abrogate  any  of  the  Ten  Commandments.  He 
everywhere  held  them  in  honour,  and  taught  men  to 
do  so.  They  are  based  on  eternal  principles  of 
right;  and  no  society  can  exist  permanently,  in 
which  they  are  habitually  disregarded.  So  there 
is  an  element  of  good  in  the  law  which  commands  a 
weekly  rest.  Man  needs  it  for  his  physical  and 
moral  good ;  and,  in  his  controversy  with  the  Jews, 
Jesus  recognized  that  fact.  In  vindicating  his  dis- 
ciples for  plucking  the  ears  on  the  sabbath  day,  he 
said,  ''  The  sabbath  was  made  for  man,  and  not  man 
for  the  sabbath  "  (Mk.  2  :  27).  And  that  brings  out 
the  entire  difference  between  him  and  the  Pharisees 
on  the  subject.  Originally  the  sabbath  was  insti- 
tuted as  a  beneficent  institution,  as  a  help  to  man's 
physical  and  moral  life.  Physically  he  needs  the  day 
for  rest  and  recreation ;  morally  he  needs  it  for  the 
cultivation  of  those  higher  and  finer  qualities,  which 
he  can  get  only  through  fellowship  with  his  brethren 
on  a  plane  higher  than  the  sordid  cares  of  business 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  71 

and  work;  and  spiritually  he  needs  it  for  com- 
munion with  his  Maker.  Jesus  recognized  that  fact, 
when  he  said  that  ''  the  sabbath  was  made  for  man." 
But  the  Jews,  in  their  insistence  on  legal  observances, 
had  reversed  the  relation.  Instead  of  holding  the 
day  as  a  means  to  man's  well-being,  they  had  made 
it  an  end  in  itself,  as  if  man  had  been  made  for  the 
sabbath.  They  had  hedged  it  about  with  a  set  of 
rules  and  regulations,  which  made  the  day  neither 
a  day  of  recreation  nor  a  day  for  moral  and  spiritual 
uplift.  As  Professor  A.  B.  Bruce  finely  puts  it, 
"  The  Pharisees  made  the  day,  not  a  boon,  but  a 
burden;  not  a  day  given  by  God  to  man  in  mercy, 
but  a  day  taken  from  man  by  God  in  an  exacting 
spirit." 

That  was  the  whole  occasion  for  the  quarrel  be- 
tween Jesus  and  the  Pharisees  on  the  subject  of  the 
sabbath.  He  did  not  object  to  the  sabbath  as  an 
institution.  He  recognized  it  as  made  for  man,  and, 
of  course,  made  for  him  by  a  beneficent  Creator. 
What  he  refused  to  observe  was  the  ridiculous  and 
burdensome  regulations  of  the  Jews,  which  turned 
what  should  have  been  a  blessing  into  a  curse. 

We  hence  find  him  laying  emphasis  on  those  por- 
tions of  the  Old  Testament,  which  show  that  the 
whole  law  is  fulfilled  in  the  one  word  love.  When 
asked,  ^'  What  commandment  is  first  of  all  ?  "  he  an- 
swered, "  The  first  is  this.  Hear,  0  Israel ;  The  Lord 
our  God,  the  Lord  is  one:  and  thou  shalt  love  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy 


73  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

soul,  and  with  all  thj  mind,  and  with  all  thy 
strength.  And  the  second  is  this,  Thou  shalt  love 
thy  neighbour  as  thyself"  (Mk.  12:29-31).  He 
changed  even  the  Ten  Commandments  from  their 
negative  into  a  positive  form,  from  ten  separate  pre- 
cepts into  one  all  comprehensive  principle. 

3.    His  Sympathy  with  the  Prophetic  Ideal 

From  all  this  now  it  is  apparent  that  Jesus  sym- 
pathized with  the  prophetic  ideal.  The  ceremonial 
and  the  legal  had  value  in  his  eyes  only  so  far  as 
they  subserved  moral  and  spiritual  ends.  "  E'ot 
every  one  that  saith  unto  me  Lord,  Lord,  shall  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  heaven:  but  he  that  doeth  the 
will  of  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven"  (Mt.  7:  21). 
And  that  will,  as  we  have  just  seen,  is  love.  Hence 
only  he  who  lives  the  life  of  love,  no  matter  what 
his  professions  may  be,  has  part  in  the  blessedness 
of  the  kingdom.  Those  only  who  have  done  deeds 
of  beneficent  kindness  to  their  fellow-men  are  wel- 
comed to  the  Judge's  right  hand  in  the  great  day 
of  judgment  (Mt.  25  :  31-46). 

How  Jesus  placed  the  moral  and  the  spiritual 
above  the  legal  and  the  ceremonial  is  shown  by  an 
incident  in  the  sabbath  controversy.  When  the 
Pharisees  found  fault  with  his  disciples  for  pluck- 
ing the  ears  on  the  sabbath  day,  he  first  called  their 
attention  to  what  David  had  done,  when  he  came  to 
the  high  priest  at  'Nob,  and  when  he  was  an  hun- 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  73 

gered, — how  lie  took  the  shew  bread  and  ate  of  it,  an 
act  w^hich  was  unlawful  except  for  the  priests.  The 
ceremonial  law  was  made  to  yield  to  a  higher  law  of 
nature.  So  the  sabbath,  which  was  intended  for 
man's  good,  must  be  made  to  yield  to  man's  well- 
being.  And  then  he  called  the  attention  of  his  critics 
to  the  prophetic  ideal,  as  that  had  been  expressed  by 
Hosea :  ''  But  if  ye  had  known  what  this  meaneth, 
I  desire  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice,  ye  would  not  have 
condemned  the  guiltless"  (Mt.  12:7).  That  is,  if 
ye  had  known  that  goodness,  righteousness,  and 
mercy  are  more  pleasing  to  God  than  any  outward 
legal  or  ritual  observances,  ye  would  not  have  con- 
demned an  act,  which  in  itself  is  not  only  perfectly 
harmless,  but  even  beneficial. 

For  Jesus  the  purpose  of  religion  was  to  restore 
man  to  right  relations  to  God  and  to  his  fellow-men. 
In  that  we  find  our  highest  well-being.  Everything 
that  contributes  to  that  end  is  in  accordance  with 
God's  holy  will ;  for  that  will  is  love,  and  seeks  only 
to  bless.  As  our  Father,  "  he  maketh  his  sun  to  rise 
on  the  evil  and  on  the  good,  and  sendeth  rain  on  the 
just  and  the  unjust  "  (Mt.  5:  45).  He  knows  what 
we  have  need  of,  before  we  ask  him ;  and  he  is  ready 
to  bless  us,  and  does  not  require  us  to  weary  our- 
selves with  long  and  repeated  petitions  (Mt.  6:5-8). 
All  that  he  requires  of  us  is  that  we  should  learn  to 
live  by  that  same  law  of  love  (Mk.  12  :  29-31).  And 
that  law,  when  put  into  practice,  restrains  a  man 
from  injuring  his  neighbour.     Yea,  it  induces  him 


74  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

to  bestow  good  on  all  men,  the  evil  as  well  as  the  good, 
enemies  as  well  as  friends  (Mt.  5:44,  45).  That 
is  the  ideal  of  Jesus.  Goodness,  righteousness,  and 
mercy  are  what  he  requires;  and  he  asks  for  rules 
and  ceremonial  observances  only  so  far  as  they  may 
help  us  to  attain  these  moral  ends.  Where  they 
interfere  with  the  attainment  of  these  ends,  they  are 
to  be  disregarded  and  set  aside  as  injurious  and  as 
contrary  to  the  will  of  God. 

This  shows  why  the  conflict  between  Jesus  and 
the  Pharisees  was  so  irreparable.  The  Pharisees 
had  a  totally  different  conception  of  the  meaning  and 
purpose  of  religion.  For  them  it  meant  the  securing 
of  God's  favour  through  the  performance  of  a  certain 
number  of  ritual  acts,  the  laying  up  for  themselves 
of  a  certain  quantity  of  merit,  on  which  they  might 
draw  to  balance  their  errors  and  defects.  They  had 
exalted  their  cult  to  the  place  of  supreme  impor- 
tance. They  had  allowed  their  relations  with  their 
fellow-men  to  become  a  matter  of  secondary  impor- 
tance (Isa.  1:10-17).  They  failed  to  realize  that 
their  sacrifices  had  value  only  in  the  proportion  in 
which  they  were  an  expression  of  their  love  to  God, 
only  so  far  as  they  had  the  power  of  drawing  the 
hearts  of  the  people  after  them  to  God.  Instead  of 
making  the  sacrifice  a  means  for  the  cultivation  of 
love  to  God,  they  had  made  it  an  end  in  itself.  Jesus 
reversed  the  order.  He  placed  all  sacrifice  into  its 
proper  secondary  place,  as  a  means  to  an  end.  Even 
prayer  has  value  only  as  it  helps  to  lift  the  soul  into 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  75 

communion  and  fellowship  with  God.  Where  it 
fails  to  subserve  that  purpose,  it  is  a  hollow  mockery, 
and  it  brings  down  only  God's  displeasure  (Mk. 
7:6,  7).  Only  when  worship  inspires  to  well-doing 
does  it  fulfil  its  purpose. 

4.    His  Conscious  Superiority 

While  Jesus  thus  recognized  the  value  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  while  he  used  it  as  Scripture  for  his 
own  edification  and  guidance  as  well  as  for  the  edi- 
fication and  guidance  of  others,  he  was  not  a  slave  to 
its  letter.  On  the  contrary,  he  always  maintained 
the  independence  of  his  own  judgment;  and  where 
necessary  he  did  not  hesitate  to  put  his  own  word 
alongside  of  it,  yea,  and  even  above  it.  This  is  one 
of  the  most  remarkable  facts  connected  with  his 
teaching.  Highly  as  he  reverenced  the  Word,  he  al- 
ways maintained  his  position  as  the  authoritative 
Interpreter  and  Judge ;  and  he  never  hesitated  to  put 
his  own  word  over  against  what  was  said  to  them 
of  old  time. 

The  classic  illustration  of  this  truth  we  find  in 
the  Sermon  on  the  Mount ;  and  it  is  both  interesting 
and  profitable  to  note  how  he  there  supplements  and 
amends  the  legislation  of  the  Old  Testament.  He 
first  takes  up  the  law  of  murder,  and  shows  that  it 
means  not  the  overt  act  of  taking  a  man's  life,  but 
that  hatred  of  the  heart  out  of  which  springs  the 
murderous  deed  (Mt.  5:  21-26).     Then  he  turns  to 


76  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

the  seventh  commandment,  and  traces  the  violation 
of  that  to  lustful  passion  (Mt.  5:  27-28).  Then  he 
passes  to  what  was  said  ahout  the  oath  (Mt.  5 :  33- 
37)  ;  then  to  the  law  of  retaliation  (Mt.  5 :  38-42) ; 
and  in  each  case  he  so  interprets  the  old  law  as  to 
put  an  entirely  new  and  original  meaning  into  it. 
To  say  that  he  supplements  it  is  not  putting  it  too 
strongly.  And  the  remarkable  thing  about  it  is  that 
he  does  not  hesitate  to  place  his,  ^^But  I  say  unto 
you "  over  against,  yea,  and  above  w^hat  was  said 
to  them  of  old  time.  What  else  can  it  mean  but 
that  he  occupied  a  position  where  he  could  declare 
the  will  of  God  w^ith  an  authority  such  as  no  one  else 
before  had  ever  had  ? 

As  we  just  saw,  Jesus  gave  the  preference  to  the 
prophetic  ideal.  In  his  eyes,  the  prophet,  whose 
mission  it  was  to  declare  the  will  of  God,  stood  on 
a  higher  plane  than  the  legislator,  who  reduced  that 
will  as  known  to  formal  rules  for  the  regulation  of 
conduct.  And  he  took  his  place  consciously  among 
the  prophets  (Mt.  13:  57).  It  is  true  that,  because 
of  what  we  have  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  in  the 
way  of  interpretation  of  the  law  of  Moses,  he  is 
sometimes  called  a  legislator;  yet  he  never  assumed 
that  title,  as  he  did  the  other,  nor  did  he  leave  any 
legislation  behind  him  except  such  as  is  embodied  in 
general  principles,  such  as  may  be  applied  to  all 
time.  But  as  a  prophet,  he  consciously  assumed  a 
position  of  superiority  over  all  who  had  preceded 
him.     As  just  intimated,  the  prophet's  mission  was 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  77 

to  declare  the  will  of  God;  and  in  that  Jesus  de- 
clared that  he  had  no  equal.  "  All  things  have  been 
delivered  unto  me  of  my  Father :  and  no  one  know- 
eth  the  Son,  save  the  Father ;  neither  doth  anv  know 
the  Father,  save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the 
Son  willeth  to  reveal  him  "  (Mt.  11 :  27). 

This  claim  to  superiority  to  all  that  is  contained 
in  the  Old  Testament  naturally  raised  the  question, 
Was  Jesus  then  a  revolutionary?  Did  he  come  to 
destroy  the  law  or  the  prophets  ?  Evidently  such  a 
question  may  be  raised  in  view  of  his  claim. 
Whether  or  not  it  was  raised  in  just  that  form  we 
do  not  know;  but  Jesus  assumed  that  either  it  might 
be  raised  or  that  it  would  be  raised.  And  so  we  hear 
him  say,  "  Think  not  that  I  came  to  destroy  the  law 
or  the  prophets :  I  came  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil  " 
(Mt.  5:17).  But  that  very  statement  implies  a 
claim  of  superiority  to  both  law  and  prophets,  as 
perhaps  no  other  statement  does;  for,  as  we  shall 
presently  see,  it  implies  that  all  the  truth  which  had 
found  a  partial  and  imperfect  expression  either 
through  the  law  or  the  prophets  had  found  its  full 
and  perfect  expression  in  him. 

5.    How  He  Fulfilled  the  Law  and  the  Prophets 

After  Jesus  had  declared  that  he  had  not  come  to 
destroy  the  law  or  the  prophets,  he  went  on  to  affirm 
their  truth  and  their  permanent  validity.  "  For 
verily  I  say  unto  you.  Till  heaven  and  earth  shall 


78  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

pass  away,  one  jot  or  tittle  shall  in  no  wise  pass 
away  from  the  law,  till  all  things  be  accomplished  " 
(Mt.  5:18).  Two  things  are  implied  in  the  state- 
ment: the  first,  that  there  is  a  permanent  and  an 
abiding  element  in  every  part  of  the  Old  Testament 
revelation;  the  other,  that  the  whole  would  be  taken 
up  into  some  new  and  higher  form,  in  which  it 
would  reach  its  fulfilment,  and  in  it  pass  aw^ay. 

There  is  a  permanent  element  in  every  part  of  the 
Old  Testament  revelation.  This  is  true  even  of  the 
merely  ceremonial,  for  which  Jesus  seems  to  have  had 
the  least  to  say.  Every  rite  or  ceremony  had  a  sym- 
bolic significance,  in  which  it  bodied  forth,  in  sensi- 
ble form,  some  aspect  of  the  truth.  The  form  was 
but  transitory,  like  the  breath  which  passes  our  lips, 
when  we  speak;  but  just  as  our  breath,  when  articu- 
lated into  speech,  expresses  truth,  so  did  they.  And 
however  little  the  symbol  in  itself  may  be  worth,  the 
truth  which  it  bodied  forth  was  as  real  and  abiding 
as  God's  Word  anywhere.  And  then  there  were  as- 
pects of  the  law,  which  were  partial  expressions  of 
great  and  eternal  principles.  They  were  only  par- 
tial expressions;  for  neither  did  the  lawmaker  have 
a  complete  vision  of  the  truth,  nor  did  he  succeed 
in  giving  it  an  expression  suited  to  all  time.  As  the 
author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  expresses  it, 
God  in  times  past  spake  unto  the  fathers  through 
the  prophets ;  but  the  revelation  was  "  by  divers  por- 
tions and  in  divers  manners"  (Heb.  1:1).  Or  as 
it  is  put  in  Isaiah,  "  Eor  it  is  precept  upon  precept. 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  79 

precept  upon  precept;  line  upon  line;  here  a  little, 
there  a  little"  (Isa.  28:10).  The  people  were  at 
no  time  prepared  for  anything  more.  God  had  to 
teach  them  as  they  were  able  to  understand ;  but 
however  small  the  portions,  in  which  it  was  given, 
every  revelation  contained  some  truth,  which  was 
destined  to  be  taken  up  finally  into  a  new  and  higher 
form.  And  until  it  had  fulfilled  the  purpose  for 
which  it  was  given,  it  was  proof  against  corruption 
and  decay. 

But  not  only  was  that  which  was  spoken  by  the 
prophets  thus  given  in  divers  portions,  but  it  was 
spoken  at  divers  times,  as  it  suited  the  need  of  the 
people.  And  this  implies  its  transient  character. 
The  form  in  which  the  revelation  was  given  was  at 
no  time  adapted  to  all  people  of  all  times.  It  was 
adapted  to  a  particular  people  at  a  particular  time; 
and  hence,  when  those  people  and  those  times  passed 
away,  the  form  in  which  it  was  expressed  itself  grew 
old,  and  became  ready  to  vanish.  Yet  it  formed 
part  of  a  progressive  revelation;  and  hence  as  soon 
as  the  more  perfect  was  come,  in  which  it  itself 
reached  its  fulfilment,  it  passed  away. 

'Now,  Jesus  is  the  fulfilment  of  all  that  was  thus 
given  "by  divers  portions  and  in  divers  manners," 
because  he  has  given  us  a  full-orbed  revelation  of 
the  Father,  and  because  he  has  given  it  in  a  form 
which  is  suited  to  all  times.  Just  this  is  the  pecu- 
liarity of  his  teaching  that  it  is  given,  not  in  the 
form  of  rules  and  regulations  which  are  adapted  to 


80  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

one  peculiar  people  at  a  given  time,  but  in  the  form 
of  principles  which  may  be  applied  to  all  times,  and 
to  all  peoples.  Beyond  his  teaching  is  the  revelation 
which  is  given  in  his  person  and  life.  All  people, 
even  the  most  illiterate  and  degraded,  can  under- 
stand a  life  of  love.  A  deed  of  beneficent  kindness 
speaks  home  to  the  hearts  of  men  everywhere  and  at 
all  times;  hence  all  that  the  missionary  needs  to  do 
to  make  himself  understood  is  to  follow  the  injunc- 
tion which  was  given  to  the  disciples  of  John.  "  Go 
and  tell  John  the  things  which  ye  have  seen  and 
heard;  the  blind  receive  their  sight,  the  lame  walk, 
the  lepers  are  cleansed ;  and  the  deaf  hear,  the  dead 
are  raised  up,  the  poor  have  the  good  tidings  preached 
unto  them"  (Lk.  7:22). 

We  may,  therefore,  say  that  whenever  a  truth, 
which  had  received  a  partial  expression  in  the  Old 
Testament,  is  led  back  to  the  ultimate  principle 
which  underlies  it,  it  has  received  its  fulfilment. 
Whenever  the  spirit  which  underlies  any  regulation 
has  been  caught  and  given  an  expression  in  such  a 
way  as  to  make  it  universally  applicable,  it  has  been 
fulfilled.  Of  this  we  have  several  illustrations  in  the 
fifth  chapter  of  Matthew.  When  the  law  had  said. 
Thou  shalt  not  kill,  it  expressed  a  great  truth  in  a 
negative  form;  but  it  required  the  magic  touch  of 
Jesus'  own  hand  to  make  it  appear  as  forbidding  all 
forms  of  hatred  and  anger.  So  again,  the  law  ex- 
pressed a  great  truth,  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of 
all  human  well-being,  when  it  said.  Thou  shalt  not 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  81 

commit  adultery;  but  the  full  meaning  of  that  law 
became  apparent  only  when  Jesus  pointed  out  that 
what  it  ultimately  aimed  at  is  absolute  purity  of 
heart.  So  again  the  law  had  made  a  great  advance 
on  all  previous  legislation,  when  it  limited  retalia- 
tion to  the  exact  amount  of  harm  which  had  been 
done;  but  the  full  purpose  of  that  regulation,  the 
inner  spirit  on  which  it  rested,  came  to  light  only 
when  Jesus  had  shown  how  the  only  true  retaliation 
is  that  which  returns  good  for  evil.  Or  taking  the 
whole  of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  the  true  meaning 
of  any  and  all  its  parts  becomes  apparent  only  when 
it  is  seen  that  the  aim  of  all  is  found  in  evoking 
love  to  God  and  man. 

6.    His  Relation  to  Contemporary  Jewish  Thought, 

As  a  child  of  his  own  age  and  nation,  and  as 
sharing  all  the  pious  hopes  and  aspirations  of  his 
people,  Jesus  was  necessarily  influenced  by  the 
thought  of  the  age  in  which  he  lived.  He  used  the 
thought-forms  which  were  current  about  him,  and 
his  teaching  is  cast  into  the  moulds  of  expression 
with  which  his  hearers  were  familiar.  And  not  only 
did  he  use  those  thought-forms  in  expressing  his 
ideas,  he  must  have  used  them  in  his  thinking;  and 
he  would  not  have  been  truly  human,  if  he  had  not 
been  influenced  in  his  development  by  them,  and  by 
the  thought  which  lay  back  of  them. 

There  is  no  evidence  that  he  was  in  any  way 


8^  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

influenced  bj  Greek  culture.  Growing  up  in  ITaza- 
reth,  where  he  was  in  constant  touch  with  the  cur- 
rents of  Greek  life  passing  to  and  fro  between  the 
East  and  the  West,  he  undoubtedly  knew  Greek ;  but 
that  is  far  from  saying  that  he  was  in  any  way  influ- 
enced by  Greek  speculative  thought.  His  contact 
with  the  Greek  life  of  Galilee  may  have  helped  to 
give  him  that  broader  outlook  on  humanity  which 
the  ordinary  Jew  did  not  have ;  but  there  is  no  trace 
of  Greek  influence  in  his  teaching,  as  there  is,  for 
example,  in  Paul  and  in  the  author  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews.  But  that  can  not  be  said  of  con- 
temporary Jewish  thought.  He  was  powerfully  influ- 
enced by  both  the  religious  tendencies,  which  we  have 
observed  in  the  Old  Testament. 

It  may  perhaps,  at  first  sight,  seem  incredible  that 
Jesus  should  have  been  influenced  in  any  way  by 
that  legalistic  tendency,  which  reached  its  full  de- 
velopment in  the  Pharisaism  of  his  day;  for  did  he 
not  come  to  a  deadly  break  with  it?  One,  how- 
ever, only  needs  to  study  carefully  the  story  of  his 
temptation  to  realize  how  deeply  the  false  Messianic 
ideals  of  his  people  took  hold  of  him,  and  how 
strenuously  he  had  to  gird  up  the  loins  of  his  mind 
against  the  insidious  poison.  He  was  doubtless 
superior  at  all  points  to  the  false  ideals  of  that 
legalistic  tendency,  as  he  was  to  the  imperfect  legis- 
lation of  the  Old  Testament;  yet  he  could  not  help 
standing  in  constant  relation  with  it,  and  feeling  its 
destructive  influence.    He  was  repelled  by  it,  and  he 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  83 

denounced  it;  yet  his  thought  could  not  help  being 
influenced  by  it.  That  influence  was,  indeed,  almost, 
if  not  quite,  entirely  of  a  negative  character,  repelling 
him,  and  making  it  necessary  for  him  to  bring  out 
the  contrary  ideal  in  stronger  colours. 

It  was  with  the  other  tendency,  the  prophetic,  that 
Jesus  stood  in  sympathy.  Although  the  spirit  of 
prophecy  seems  to  have  departed  from  the  mass  of 
the  people,  there  were  persons  of  deep  spirituality, 
in  whom  the  ideals  of  the  old  prophets  still  lived. 
These  were  "  looking  for  the  consolation  of  Israel " 
(Lk.  2 :  25).  What  their  hopes  and  aspirations  were 
may  be  dimly  seen  in  the  songs  of  Elizabeth  and 
Mary,  of  Zacharias  and  Simeon,  and  in  certain  of 
the  Apocalypses,  which  were  written  during  the  cen- 
tury preceding  the  coming  of  Christ.  Chief  among 
these  are  the  Similitudes  of  Enoch.  As  we  know, 
the  book  of  Enoch  was  by  many  looked  upon  as 
Scripture,  and  it  is  quoted  as  such  in  the  Epistle 
of  Jude  (vs.  14-16).  There  are  striking  resem- 
blances between  its  teaching  and  that  of  Jesus.  Here 
we  find  the  title,  ^'  The  Son  of  man,"  used  as  a  name 
for  the  Messiah;  and  much  that  is  found  in  Jesus' 
conception  of  his  Messianic  mission  is  foreshadowed. 

The  question,  How  shall  we  account  for  the  simi- 
larity ?  unavoidably  presses  for  an  answer.  It  is  ad- 
mitted now  that  the  book  is  prechristian.  Did  Jesus 
borrow  from  its  pages  ?  We  may  freely  admit  that 
he  used  the  Messianic  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  that  they  helped  him  in  the  development  of 


84i  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

his  Messianic  programme.  Such  was  almost  surely 
the  case  with  the  fifty-third  chapter  of  Isaiah;  and 
we  need  not  stumble  at  the  thought  that  he  may  have 
used  the  elements  of  truth  which  he  found  in  the 
Similitudes  of  Enoch.  And  yet  it  may  not  be  neces- 
sary to  go  to  the  length  of  saying  that  he  either 
knew  or  used  the  book.  It  is  possible  that  he  did; 
and  yet  it  is  far  from  certain.  The  similarity  be- 
tw^een  his  teaching  and  that  found  in  the  book  may 
possibly  be  accounted  for  on  the  supposition  that  its 
ideas  had  become  current  in  that  pious  circle  to 
which  he  belonged.  But  whatever  the  explanation, 
the  fact  of  some  relation  between  the  book  and  the 
teaching  of  Jesus,  as  that  has  come  down  to  us,  is 
beyond  dispute;  and  the  fact  helps  us  to  realize  the 
relation  which  existed  between  him  and  contem- 
poraneous Jewish  thought.  In  it  and  in  the  other 
Pseudepigrapha,  we  find  the  immediate  historical 
background  on  which  the  teaching  of  Jesus  must  be 
studied. 


IV 

THE  COE'CEPTIOlSr  OF  GOD 

THE  central  theme  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus  is 
the  kingdom  of  God.  That  was  the  subject 
of  his  preaching  at  the  beginning  of  his  Gali- 
lean ministry.  "  ;N'ow  after  John  was  delivered  up, 
Jesus  came  into  Galilee,  preaching  the  gospel  of 
God,  and  saying,  The  time  is  fulfilled,  and  the  king- 
dom of  God  is  at  hand :  repent  ye,  and  believe  in  the 
gospel''  (Mk.  1:14,  15).  That  it  formed  the  con- 
stant theme  of  all  his  teaching  is  apparent  from  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  from  his  many  inimitable 
parables.  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  especially  in 
the  form  in  which  it  is  recorded  in  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  Matthew,  is  a  collection  of  the  teaching  of 
Jesus.  It  is  not  clear  whether  it  is  a  collection  of 
the  teaching  during  the  entire  period  of  his  public 
ministry,  or  simply  a  collection  of  the  teaching  of 
the  early  Galilean  ministry.  Probably  the  latter  is 
the  more  nearly  correct  view.  But  whether  we  say 
that  it  was  spoken  at  one  time,  or  that  we  have  in 
it  a  collection  of  the  teaching  of  the  entire  ministry, 
or  simply  a  collection  of  the  early  Galilean  teaching, 
its  theme  is  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  presents  the 
character  of  the  citizens  of  the  kingdom,  their  place 

85 


86  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

in  the  world,  the  righteousness  which  is  required  of 
them,  and  the  kind  of  life  which  they  must  live.  So 
the  parables  are,  all  of  them,  parables  of  the  king- 
dom. They  illustrate  what  the  kingdom  is,  how  it 
is  established  and  built  up,  and  how  the  king- 
doms of  this  world  are  to  become  the  kingdom  of 
God. 

Because  of  this  fact,  it  might  seem  as  if,  in  a 
study  like  this,  one  ought  to  begin  with  the  idea  of 
the  kingdom  of  Grod.  Many  have  done  so ;  and  there 
is  much  to  be  said  in  favour  of  such  a  method. 
Jesus'  conception  of  the  kingdom  doubtless  deter- 
mined his  plan  of  work;  and  it  finally  precipitated 
that  conflict  between  him  and  the  Jewish  hierarchy 
which  brought  him  to  the  cross;  and  it  lies  at  the 
basis  of  all  his  teaching.  'No  one  can  understand 
his  teaching  who  does  not  have  a  correct  conception 
of  his  idea  of  the  kingdom.  Yet  it  is  to  be  observed, 
Jesus  did  not  take  as  his  theme  simply  the  idea  of  a 
kingdom,  but  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Who  and 
what  God  is  determines  what  the  kingdom  is  to  be. 
Hence  the  idea  of  God  is  determinative  of  the  con- 
ception of  the  kingdom ;  and  before  any  one  can  get 
a  correct  conception  of  Jesus'  idea  of  the  kingdom, 
he  must  ascertain  what  his  conception  of  God  was. 
That  in  the  end  is  fundamental  in  all  his  teaching, 
just  as  it  is  in  all  religion;  and  hence  our  proper 
starting-point  is  Jesus'  conception  of  God. 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  87 

1.    Names  Used  hy  Jesus  to  Designate  God, 

JesTis  was  a  Jew.  As  such,  he,  of  course,  was  a 
monotheist.  This  appears,  not  so  much  from  his 
express  sayings,  as  from  his  entire  religious  attitude. 
He  always  spoke  of  the  one,  only,  true  God.  Him 
he  addressed  in  his  prayers.  On  one  occasion,  when 
he  was  asked  hy  one  of  the  scribes,  ''  What  command- 
ment is  first  of  all,"  he  replied  by  quoting  Deuteron- 
omy 6:5;  and  according  to  Mark,  he  quoted  the  in- 
troductory words,  which  emphasize  the  unity  of  God. 
^^  Hear,  O  Israel,  the  Lord  our  God,  the  Lord  is  one '' 
(Mk.  12:29). 

On  several  occasions  Jesus  referred  to  God  as 
King.  This,  however,  occurs  quite  incidentally,  as 
if  he  were  employing  the  language  of  everyday  life. 
In  speaking  about  oaths,  he  said,  "  Swear  not  at  all ; 
neither  by  heaven,  for  it  is  God's  throne;  neither  by 
the  earth,  for  it  is  the  footstool  of  his  feet;  nor 
by  Jerusalem,  for  it  is  the  city  of  the  great  King '' 
(Mt.  5:34,  35).  In  two  parables,  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  likened  to  a  certain  king,  where  the  king 
is  clearly  intended  to  represent  God  (Mt.  18:23; 
22:2).  And  the  conception  underlies  all  that  he 
says  on  the  subject  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven;  for 
such  a  kingdom  is  possible  only,  if  God  is  a  sov- 
ereign King,  whose  will  is  supreme,  and  who  gov- 
erns by  the  laws  of  his  ordaining. 

But  Jesus'  characteristic  designation  for  God  is 
Father.    That  is  the  name  which  he  used  in  the  first 


88  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

word  which  we  catch  from  his  lips.  "  Wist  ye  not 
that  I  must  be  in  my  Father's  house''  (Lk.  2:49). 
And  it  is  found  again  in  the  prayer  which  he  uttered 
with  his  expiring  breath  on  the  cross.  '^  Father,  into 
thy  hands  I  commend  my  spirit "  (Lk.  23  :  46).  It 
is  the  name,  moreover,  which  is  constantly  found 
on  his  lips  in  all  his  prayers  during  his  entire 
public  ministry.  The  only  exception  is  the  an- 
guished cry  on  the  cross,  ''  My  God,  my  God,  why 
hast  thou  forsaken  me  ?  "  (Mk.  15 :  34)  ;  and  that  is 
a  quotation  from  Psalm  22 : 1.  And  he  put  the  same 
name  into  our  lips,  when  he  taught  us  to  say,  ^'  Our 
Father  who  art  in  heaven  "  (Mt.  6:9).  So  likewise 
did  he  speak  of  God  as  Father,  when  he  referred 
to  him  in  the  third  person.  Sometimes  he  referred 
to  him  as  "my  Father"  (Mt.  11:27),  sometimes 
as  "thy  Father"  (Mt.  Q:Q),  sometimes  as  "your 
Father"  (Mt.  6:15)  and  "your  heavenly  Father" 
(Mt.  6:26),  and . sometimes  simply  as  "the  Fa- 
ther" (Mk.  13:32). 

We  can  hence  not  go  wrong,  when  w©  say  that 
the  name  expresses  that  which  is  characteristic  in  his 
conception  of  God;  and  considering  the  manner  in 
which  the  name  is  used,  we  infer  that  it  is  expressive 
of  his  own  peculiar  religious  experience.  When  he 
replied  to  his  mother's  question  in  the  temple,  "  How 
is  it  that  ye  sought  me  ?  Wist  ye  not  that  I  must 
be  in  my  Father's  house  ?  "  he  undoubtedly  gave  ex- 
pression to  his  deepest  religious  consciousness  at  the 
time.     The  same  may  be  said  of  that  remarkable 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  89 

thanksgiving,  in  which  occur  the  words,  "  All  things 
have  been  delivered  unto  me  of  my  Father  "  (Mt. 
11:  27).  And  certainly  nothing  less  can  be  said  of 
his  last  prayer  on  the  cross.  All  else  was  about  to 
be  shut  out  from  his  view;  he  was  then  alone  with 
God ;  and  "  Father  "  is  the  name  which  came  well- 
ing up  out  of  his  deepest  consciousness. 

As  the  name  Father  expresses  that  which  is  char- 
acteristic of  Jesus'  conception  of  God,  so  it  denotes 
that  which  is  fundamental  in  the  character  and  being 
of  God.  Hence  when  we  say  that  God  is  Father, 
we  have  given  the  fullest  definition  of  what  God 
is  that  it  is  possible  to  give.  According  to  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  Jesus  once  gave  a  definition  of  what  God 
is  as  to  his  nature:  "God  is  spirit"  (Jn.  4:24). 
And  in  the  First  Epistle  of  John  there  are  two 
definitions  of  what  God  is  as  to  his  character.  The 
one  is,  "  God  is  light''  (1  Jn.  1:5);  and  the  other, 
"  God  is  love  "  (1  Jn.  4:8,  16).  But  none  of  them 
expresses  so  fully  what  God  is  in  his  inmost  being 
as  the  name  Father.  Hence  by  ascertaining  what 
Jesus  meant  when  he  used  this  name,  we  shall  get  at 
the  very  heart  of  his  great  and  unique  revelation. 

2.    What  Meaning  Jesus  Put  into  the  Name 

The  first  thing  that  is  to  be  observed  is  that  the 
name  expresses  the  idea  of  personality;  for  only 
a  personal  God  can  be  Father.  When  Jesus  said, 
"  My  Father,"  he  was  conscious  of  standing  in  a 


90  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

personal  relation  to  God;  and  when  he  taught  us  to 
say,  "  Our  Father,"  he  likewise  suggested  that  we 
stand  in  personal  fellowship  with  him. 

Now,  when  we  come  to  define  this  personal  rela- 
tionship more  closely,  it  is  possible  for  us  to  approach 
the  subject  from  several  points  of  view. 

Fatherhood  suggests  the  idea  of  origin.  The  child 
owes  his  very  being  and  life  to  his  parents.  So  does 
man  owe  his  existence  to  the  God  who  made  him. 
Hence  it  is  easy  to  think  of  God  as  Father  because 
of  the  fact  that  he  created  us.  That  seems  to  be 
the  thought  in  Malachi  2 :  10 :  "  Have  we  not  all 
one  father  ?  hath  not  one  God  created  us  ?  "  The 
thought  is,  no  doubt,  valid;  "for  we  are  his  work- 
manship "  (Eph.  2 :  10)  ;  but  it  is  to  be  observed, 
when  Jesus  speaks  of  God  as  Father,  this  is  not  the 
point  of  view  from  which  the  relation  is  contem- 
plated. 

Then  again  the  idea  of  fatherhood  suggests  natural 
kinship.  The  child  is  the  offspring  of  the  parent,  a 
partaker  of  his  nature,  bound  to  him  by  natural 
kinship.  And  that  conception  has  been  emphasized 
in  describing  our  relation  to  God.  Thus  Paul,  in 
his  address  before  the  Areopagus,  quoting  a  heathen 
poet,  says,  "  For  we  are  also  his  offspring "  (Acts 
17:28).  It  is  a  very  lofty  conception;  and  it  im- 
plies the  idea  that,  as  it  is  put  in  2  Peter  1:4,  we 
are  "  partakers  of  the  divine  nature."  But  again  it 
is  to  be  noted,  Jesus  does  not  have  this  idea  in  mind, 
when  he  speaks  of  God  as  Father.    He  rather  con- 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  91 

templates  Grod  in  his  ethical  relations;  and  his  con- 
ception of  God's  Fatherhood  is  based  especially  on 
what  he  is  in  his  character,  on  what  he  has  done 
for  us,  and  what  he  is  still  doing  for  us. 

!N'ow,  the  fundamental  fact  in  God's  character  as 
Father  is  his  love;  and  in  what  his  love  prompts 
him  to  do  we  have  the  highest  and  most  perfect 
expression  of  his  Fatherhood.  When  Jesus  points 
out  what  we  must  do  to  be  children  of  God,  he  says, 
"  Love  your  enemies,  and  pray  for  them  that  per- 
secute you;  that  ye  may  be  sons  of  your  Father 
which  is  in  heaven;  for  he  maketh  his  sun  to  rise 
on  the  evil  and  on  the  good,  and  sendeth  rain  on  the 
just  and  the  unjust  "  (Mt.  5 :  44,  45).  And  in  the 
exercise  of  his  fatherly  love,  he  watches  over  us,  so 
that  not  a  hair  can  fall  from  our  heads  without  his 
will  (Mt.  10:  30),  so  that  we  can  also  rely  on  him 
for  all  things  necessary  for  soul  and  body  (Mt. 
6:24-34).  He  offers  us  free  forgiveness  of  our 
transgressions,  whenever  we  put  ourselves  into  the 
condition,  where  forgiveness  is  possible  (Mt.  6: 14). 
In  the  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son,  the  father  is 
indeed  represented  as  waiting  at  home,  until  the 
prodigal  comes  to  himself  through  sad  experience ; 
but  it  is  to  be  noted,  he  is  represented  as  waiting 
in  an  expectant  attitude ;  and  as  soon  as  the  prodigal 
has  determined  to  return,  the  father  runs  to  meet 
him.  He  sees  him  while  as  yet  he  is  a  great  way 
off;  and  when  he  meets  him  he  falls  on  his  neck 
and  kisses  him,  before  ever  the  son  is  able  to  make 


9a  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

his  carefully  framed  confession.  As  Father,  God 
is  not  merely  willing  to  meet  the  penitent  halfway; 
but  he  himself  goes  to  seek  the  lost.  In  the  com- 
panion parables  of  the  Lost  Sheep  and  the  Lost  Coin, 
the  Father's  love  is  set  forth  in  its  seeking  and 
saving  activity.  And  so  Jesus  represents  himself  as 
having  come  from  the  Father  ^'  to  seek  and  to  save 
that  which  was  lost"  (Lk.  19: 10). 

And  this  is  borne  out,  not  simply  by  the  explicit 
teaching  of  Jesus,  but  also  by  that  revelation  which 
is  found  in  his  life  and  deeds.  Jesus  was  himself 
the  highest  revelation  of  God;  and  in  what  he  was 
and  did  we  see  what  God  is  and  does.  This  is  ex- 
plicitly stated  in  John  14 :  9,  "  He  that  hath  seen 
me  hath  seen  the  Father."  And  that  which  was 
characteristic  of  the  life  of  Jesus  was  his  deeds  of 
beneficent  kindness.  When  John  became  despondent 
in  prison,  and  sent  two  of  his  disciples  to  ask,  "  Art 
thou  he  that  cometh,  or  do  we  look  for  another," 
Jesus  replied  by  referring  him  to  his  works.  ^'  Go 
your  way,  and  tell  John  the  things  which  ye  do  hear 
and  see:  the  blind  receive  their  sight,  and  the  lame 
walk,  the  lepers  are  cleansed,  and  the  deaf  hear,  and 
the  dead  are  raised  up,  and  the  poor  have  the  good 
tidings  preached  to  them  "  (Mt.  11 :  3-5).  His  deeds 
of  beneficent  kindness  were  his  credentials,  and  that 
because  they  were  manifestations  of  God's  character 
in  him. 

And  this  love  is  represented  as  existing  in  the 
Father  in  absolute  perfection.     When  Jesus  wished 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  93 

to  hold  up  before  the  disciples  an  ideal,  he  pointed  to 
the  way  in  which  the  Father  is  showing  love  to  all, 
the  jnst  and  the  unjust  alike  (Mt.  5:43-47).  And 
then,  as  if  the  disciples  might  feel  discouraged  be- 
cause the  ideal  was  so  high,  so  far  above  their  reach 
at  the  time,  he  gave  them  the  promise,  "  Ye  there- 
fore shall  be  perfect,  as  your  heavenly  Father  is 
perfect"  (Mt.  5:48).  The  goal  is  indeed  far  off, 
exceedingly  high,  so  that  many  of  us  are  constantly 
in  danger  of  despairing  of  our  ever  being  able  to 
attain  it ;  yet  such  is  G-od's  love,  such  is  his  constant 
help  in  our  weakness,  that  we  have  the  assurance  that 
by  and  by,  if  only  we  submit  in  patience  to  his 
fatherly  chastening,  we  shall  become  like  him.  But 
the  point  to  be  especially  noted  is  that  God  is  repre- 
sented as  perfect,  and  perfect  in  that  quality  which 
was  just  under  consideration,  namely,  in  love.  And 
to  this  that  other  statement  in  Mark  10 :  18  also 
points.  The  young  ruler  had  said,  ^'Good  Teacher, 
what  shall  I  do  that  I  may  inherit  eternal  life  ?  " 
and  Jesus  replied,  "  Why  callest  thou  me  good  ?  none 
is  good  save  one,  even  God."  That  does  not  mean 
that  Jesus  had  any  sins  to  confess;  but  simply  that 
he  himself  had  not  yet  attained  unto  a  state  of  per- 
fection. He  was  still  in  the  stage  of  moral  develop- 
ment and  trial,  in  which  he  was  beset  by  temptation. 
But  of  the  Father  he  affirms  such  perfection.  In 
that  fullest,  highest  sense,  in  which  temptation  is  not 
possible,  and  in  which  there  can  be  no  moral  devel- 
opment, but  in  which  all  the  virtues  are  fully  and 


94  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

absolutely  realized,  the  title  could  be  applied  only 
to  God.  He  is  the  only  supremely  good,  the  only 
One  in  whom  perfect  love  is  fully  and  forever  real- 
ized. 

3.    The  Extent  of  God's  Fatherhood 

Of  whom  now  does  Jesus  affirm  that  God  is  Fa- 
ther ?  Several  things  are  clear  from  what  has  already 
been  said.  Jesus  called  God,  ^'  My  Father,"  imply- 
ing that  he  had  no  doubt  about  the  fact  that  God 
stood  in  that  relation  to  himself.  He  likewise  said 
^'  Your  Father,"  when  speaking  to  the  disciples,  im- 
plying with  equal  certainty  that  he  is  the  Father  of 
all  such  as  believe  in  him. 

Is  God  likewise  the  Father  of  all  men?  That 
might  be  open  to  question;  for  Jesus  nowhere  spe- 
cifically says  so.  Yet  there  are  statements  which 
clearly  imply  it.  It  might  perhaps  be  inferred  from 
his  use  of  the  simple  title,  '^  the  Father."  But  we 
have  better  evidence.  Inasmuch  as  his  Fatherhood 
consists  primarily  of  those  ethical  qualities  which 
are  summed  up  in  the  word  love,  we  may  affirm  that 
he  is  the  Father  of  all  towards  whom  he  exercises 
his  great  love ;  and  that  includes  all  men.  ^'  He 
maketh  his  sun  to  rise  on  the  good  and  on  the  evil, 
and  sendeth  rain  on  the  just  and  on  the  unjust " 
(Mt.  5:45).  In  the  same  connection  he  affirms 
that  we  become  sons  of  God  (for  the  verb  used 
in  the  Greek  is  yivr/aOs^  not  ^jre  as  one  might  be 
led  to  infer  from  our  versions)  ;  but  such  an  affirma- 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  95 

tion  is  nowhere  made  with  reference  to  God.  He 
is  the  Father.  The  difference  arises  out  of  our  dif- 
ference in  moral  status.  We  were  created  to  be  sons. 
That  is  the  high  destiny  to  which  we  were  called 
from  the  beginning.  But  our  moral  characters  had 
to  be  formed;  and  when  we  began  our  moral  exist- 
ence, we  began  to  realize  a  contrary  ideal.  We  failed 
to  realize  the  ideal  for  which  we  were  created;  and 
hence  we  must  all  become  sons  of  God.  But  such 
was  not  the  case  with  God.  He  was  always  what 
he  should  be.  He  has  always  realized  the  ideal  of 
his  being  fully ;  and  hence  he  always  is  Father.  And 
he  is  the  Father  of  all  who  are  the  recipients  of  his 
love. 

But  that  suggests  another  question.  Did  Jesus 
think  of  God's  Fatherhood  as  eternal  like  his  being? 
Or  did  he  represent  him  as  becoming  Father  through 
the  act  of  creation,  because  he  has  called  a  universe 
of  intelligent  and  moral  beings  into  existence  ?  Per- 
haps it  is  impossible  to  give  a  definite  answer;  for 
Jesus  has  nowhere  left  us  a  specific  statement  on  the 
subject.  And  yet  there  are  statements  in  which  he 
sets  the  two  concepts,  the  Father — the  Son,  over 
against  each  other  in  such  a  correlation  as  to  sug- 
gest, if  not  to  imply,  that  the  distinction  belongs  to 
the  very  being  of  God.  One  of  these  we  find  in 
the  passage,  already  quoted  several  times,  Matthew 
11 :  27 ;  another  is  found  in  Mark  13 :  32,  also  quoted 
above.  And  it  is  to  be  observed,  the  one  comes  from 
the  Logia  of  Matthew,  while  the  other  belongs  to 


96  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

Mark;  so  that  we  have  a  double  attestation  to  the 
fact  that  it  was  Jesus'  custom  thus  to  refer  to  him- 
self in  relation  to  God.  The  Father  and  the  Son  are 
in  both  passages  spoken  of  absolutely,  not  as  entering 
into  that  relation,  but  as  being  in  it. 

And  if  this  is  correct,  then  there  are  several  other 
things  which  may  be  affirmed.  God  is  Father  in  the 
very  essence  of  his  being.  His  Fatherhood  is  not 
a  state  into  which  he  enters  by  any  act  of  his  in 
time;  it  is  the  state  in  which  he  has  always  been. 
As  the  idea  of  love  is  inseparable  from  the  concep- 
tion of  his  being,  so  is  his  Fatherhood.  If  he  had 
become  Father  by  virtue  of  the  creation,  we  should 
have  to  think  of  his  almighty  power  as  the  funda- 
mental attribute  of  his  being;  and  that  would  give 
us  a  being,  whom  we  might  fear,  but  whom  we  could 
not  approach  in  filial  trust  and  confidence.  But  if 
he  is  Father  in  the  very  essence  of  his  being,  from 
eternity,  and  not  simply  from  the  beginning  of  the 
creation,  then  he  stands  before  us  in  a  different  as- 
pect. There  is  nothing  so  signally  characteristic  of 
him  as  his  fatherly  love;  and  hence  we  may  at  all 
times,  even  in  our  state  of  alienation  and  sin,  look 
to  him  with  confidence  and  trust. 

And  a  second  consequence  must  follow.  If  God 
is  eternally  Father,  in  himself  and  not  simply  in 
relation  to  the  creation  on  the  outside  of  him,  then 
he  must  have  the  social  distinctions,  implied  in 
Father  and  Son,  within  himself.  The  word  Trinity 
nowhere  occurs  in  the  'New  Testament ;  and  we  may 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  97 

freely  grant  that  Jesus  did  not  teach  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  at  least  not  in  its  later  ecclesiastical 
form.  But  are  not  the  elements  of  the  doctrine  im- 
plied in  his  teaching?  and  is  not  the  basis  of  the 
doctrine  to  be  found  in  the  very  fact  which  we  are 
now  considering?  Our  answer  to  the  question  de- 
pends on  the  interpretation  which  we  put  on  Jesus' 
use  of  the  name  Father.  And  it  certainly  seems 
more  likely  that  Jesus  conceived  of  God's  Father- 
hood as  inhering  in  his  very  essence,  than  as  an 
attribute  which  he  has  acquired  through  his  creative 
act. 

In  dealing  with  this  subject  it  is  well  for  us  to 
remember  that  the  first  disciples  were  all  Jews. 
The  doctrine  of  God's  unity  was  ingrained  in  their 
very  bones ;  and  anything  which  could  in  any  way 
suggest  the  polytheistic  conception  of  deity  which 
prevailed  in  the  surrounding  heathen  world  was  ab- 
solutely abhorrent  to  them.  And  yet  in  the  very 
earliest  Christian  literature,  written  within  the  first 
quarter  of  a  century  after  the  death  of  Jesus,  he  is 
referred  to  in  such  a  way  that  it  is  difficult  to  de- 
scribe the  effect  of  the  language  in  any  other  way 
than  by  saying  that  he  is  placed  on  an  equality  with 
God  (Thess.  1:1;  2  Thess.  1:2;  1  Thess.  3:11). 
How  can  we  account  for  it,  except  on  the  basis  that 
Jesus  himself  had  given  them  a  teaching  which  im- 
plied that  God  is,  not  a  single  monad,  but  a  being 
who  possesses  the  social  distinctions  within  himself; 
and  that  when  he  spoke  of  "  the  Father — ^the  Son," 


m  THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

he  did  so  in  a  way  to  impress  the  disciples  with  the 
thought  that  the  Fatherhood  is  an  eternal  quality, 
inherent  in  his  very  being,  rather  than  a  secondary 
quality  which  was  acquired  through  his  creative 
activity.^ 

4.    The  Attitude  of  the  Father's  Love  Toward  Sin 

Paul  speaks  of  a  revelation  of  God's  wrath  as 
well  as  of  his  righteousness  and  love.  "  For  the 
wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven  against  all 
ungodliness  and  unrighteousness  of  men,  who  hinder 
the  truth  in  unrighteousness  "  (Rom.  1 :  18).  A  sim- 
ilar conception  is  found  in  the  Johannine  interpre- 
tation of  Christ.    "  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath 

I 
*  On  this  point  Professor  W.  Sanday  has  a  paragraph,  in 
his  Outlines  of  the  Life  of  Christ,  which  is  suggestive.  He 
says,  "  When,  therefore,  we  find  that  one  Gospel  ascribes  to 
our  Lord  rather  full  and  detailed  teaching  respecting  the 
Paraclete,  which  is  explained  to  be  another  name  for  the 
Holy  Spirit  (Jn.  14:  16,  26;  15:  26),  when  there  is  held  out 
a  clear  hope  and  promise  of  a  new  Divine  influence  to  take 
the  place  of  that  which  is  withdrawn,  and  when  in  another 
Gospel  we  are  also  told  of  the  institution  of  a  rite  associated 
with  a  new  revelation  of  God  under  a  threefold  name,  that  of 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  (Mt.  28:19),  these  phenomena 
are  just  such  as  we  should  have  had  to  assume  even  if  we 
had  no  definite  record  of  them.  We  may,  then,  regard  them 
as  having  received — whatever  the  antecedent  claims  of  the 
document  in  which  they  are  found — a  very  considerable  de- 
gree of  critical  verification.  The  single  verse  2  Corinthians 
13:  14  seems  to  require  something  very  like  what  we  find  in  St. 
Matthew  and  St.  John"  (pp.  99,  100). 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  99 

eternal  life;  but  lie  that  obeyeth  not  the  Son  shall 
not  see  life,  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  upon  him  " 
(Jn,  3:  36).  So  our  Christian  theologies  have  been 
full  of  the  idea  of  God's  wrath.  Is  this  idea  also 
found  in  the  Synoptic  teaching  of  Jesus  ?  Is  it  com- 
patible with  the  idea  of  God's  fatherly  love?  To 
find  the  answer  to  the  questions,  we  must  inquire 
into  the  attitude  of  the  Father's  love  towards  sin. 

It  should  be  noted,  in  the  first  place,  that  no  ex- 
pression at  all  parallel  to  the  two  just  quoted  can 
be  found  in  the  Synoptic  teaching  of  Jesus.  He 
does  not  speak  of  the  wrath  of  God  as  he  does  of  the 
love  of  God.  And  yet  there  are  sayings  which  seem 
to  imply  something  of  the  kind.  In  the  apocalyptic 
discourse,  as  recorded  by  Luke,  Jesus  is  made  to  say, 
"  Woe  unto  them  that  are  with  child  and  to  them 
that  give  suck  in  those  days !  for  there  shall  be  great 
distress  upon  the  land,  and  wrath  upon  this  people  " 
(Lk.  21 :  23)  ;  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  in 
the  mind  of  the  evangelist  the  wrath  referred  to 
is  the  wrath  of  God.  But  it  is  to  be  noted  that 
neither  Matthew  nor  Mark  have  the  words,  ^^  and 
wrath  upon  this  people,"  in  the  parallel  passages, 
which  seems  to  imply  that  the  words  are  not  the 
words  of  Jesus  but  an  interpretative  enlargement  of 
the  evangelist's.  And  if  we  had  nothing  more,  we 
should  be  compelled  to  doubt  whether  Jesus  shared 
the  conception  with  reference  to  God's  wrath  which 
was  prevalent  in  his  day. 

In  the  two  parables  in  which  Jesus  represents  God 


100        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

as  a  King,  we  have  statements  which  approach  more 
nearly  to  the  Pauline  and  the  Johannine  teaching 
on  the  subject.  In  the  parable  of  the  Unmerciful 
Servant,  after  the  other  servants  had  brought  the 
news  of  his  ungracious  conduct  to  the  king,  the  state- 
ment is  made,  '^  And  his  lord  was  wroth,  and  deliv- 
ered him  to  the  tormentors,  till  he  should  pay  all 
that  was  due"  (Mt.  18:34).  So  in  the  parable  of 
the  Marriage  of  the  King's  Son,  we  have  a  similar 
statement.  When  the  report  is  brought  to  the  king 
that  those,  who  had  been  bidden  to  the  marriage, 
had  not  only  made  light  of  the  invitation,  but  treated 
his  servants  shamefully  and  killed  them,  he  too  is 
said  to  have  been  wroth,  and  to  have  '^  sent  his 
armies,  and  destroyed  those  murderers,  and  burnt  up 
their  city"  (Mt.  22:7).  In  both  cases,  the  king 
represents  God,  and  what  is  said  of  him  is  naturally 
taken  as  referring  to  God.  And  yet  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  in  neither  case  is  that  the  main  point 
in  the  parable ;  and  one  might  say  that,  belonging  to 
the  subordinate  features,  it  is  part  of  the  parabolic 
drapery.  And  it  must  be  still  further  admitted  that 
it  is  perilous  to  rest  any  important  teaching  wholly 
in  a  parabolic  representation,  and  especially  if,  as 
is  the  case  here,  the  representation  comes  to  us  in 
one  of  the  subordinate  features  of  the  parable.  It 
may  serve  as  a  part  of  a  cumulative  argument;  but 
it  can  scarcely  stand  as  its  main  basis.  We  must, 
therefore,  say  again,  if  this  were  all  we  had,  we 
should  hesitate  to  affirm  that  Jesus  taught  anything 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  101 

on  the  wrath  of  God,  sufficiently  definite  to  enable 
us  to  affirm  that  his  teaching  is  the  basis  of  what 
Paul  and  John  and  the  church  have  taught  with  refer- 
ence to  that  subject. 

Is,  then,  this  all  that  we  have?  In  the  way  of 
explicit  teaching  it  is  about  all ;  and  yet  that  can  not 
be  taken  as  representing  all  that  we  find  in  the  reve- 
lation of  Jesus.  As  we  said  above,  his  revelation 
is  broader  than  his  mere  teaching  by  word  of  mouth ; 
and  in  this  broader  revelation,  which  comes  to  us 
through  his  life,  we  do  have  more. 

We  have  above  recognized  his  deeds  of  beneficent 
kindness  as  a  part  of  his  great  revelation  of  the 
Father's  love.  As  we  may  see  the  Father's  attitude 
towards  the  suffering  and  the  fallen  in  the  way  in 
which  Jesus  dealt  with  them,  so  we  may  find  the 
Father's  attitude  towards  the  impenitent  in  the  way 
in  which  Jesus  bore  himself  towards  them.  And  on 
this  point  we  have  the  direct  evidence  of  the  evan- 
gelist, and  also  of  his  own  deeds.  Mark  tells  us  that, 
when  the  man  with  the  withered  hand  was  before 
him,  "  they  watched  him,  whether  he  would  heal 
him  on  the  sabbath  day."  He  then  put  to  them  the 
question,  "  Is  it  lawful  on  the  sabbath  day  to  do  good 
or  to  do  harm  ?  to  save  a  life  or  to  kill  ?  "  And 
when  they  refused  to  give  him  any  answer  to  so 
plain  a  question,  he  looked  round  about  on  them 
"  with  anger,"  being  grieved  at  the  hardening  of 
their  hearts  (Mk.  3:5).  Jesus  knew  how  to  ^^  be 
angry,  and  sin  not " ;   and  there  were  times  when 


102        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

he  allowed  his  indignation  to  break  forth  into  ter- 
rible and  most  withering  rebukes.  Where  is  there 
a  Philippic,  which  burns  with  such  indignation  and 
wrath,  as  his  denunciation  of  the  scribes  and  Phari- 
sees in  the  twenty-third  chapter  of  Matthew?  And 
if  he  is  indeed  the  perfect  revelation  of  the  Father, 
we  must  recognize  that  as  part  of  it,  just  as  much 
as  his  deeds  of  beneficent  kindness. 

Our  second  question,  however,  still  remains.  Is 
such  a  conception  compatible  with  the  idea  of  God's 
fatherly  love,  which  causes  his  sun  to  rise  on  the  evil 
and  the  good,  and  which  sendeth  rain  on  the  just  and 
the  unjust? 

The  answer  to  the  question  depends  on  our  con- 
ception of  what  is  meant  by  the  wrath  of  God ;  and 
in  trying  to  define  that  we  need  to  remember  that 
w©  are  dealing  with  an  anthropopathism.  In  the 
poverty  of  human  language,  we  have  tried  to  describe 
our  conception  of  God's  feeling  by  ascribing  to  him 
our  own.  The  description  rests  on  our  likeness  to 
God.  And  within  limits  it  is  valid.  It  is  important, 
however,  to  remember  that  the  parallelism  between 
God  and  man  holds  only  to  a  certain  extent,  only  as 
far  as  we  have  proved  true  to  our  likeness  to  him. 
!N'ow,  he  is  affected  by  sin  just  as  we  are.  His  heart 
is  wounded  by  it.  It  is  an  evil  which  he  rejects  with 
the  whole  energy  of  his  being.  There  is  a  self- 
determination  against  sin  of  such  a  kind  as  to  array 
against  it  all  that  is  in  him.  As  it  is  a  violation  of 
his  holy  law  and  of  the  law  of  his  universe,  it  has 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  103 

arrayed  against  it  all  the  force  and  energy  of  that 
law  5  and  that  means  that  the  penalty  of  that  law 
must  be  inflicted  on  it.  And  snch  self-determination 
against  sin  is  not  a  contradiction  of  his  love.  In 
fact  it  is  the  self-determination  of  love  itself  against 
sin.  But  here  the  analogy  between  our  feeling  with 
reference  to  sin  and  God's  ends.  With  us,  even 
with  the  holiest  of  us,  there  is  always  an  element  of 
hatred  against  the  sinner  mingled  with  our  indigna- 
tion against  the  sin, — an  element  which  gives  us 
satisfaction,  when  we  see  the  impenitent  sinner  suffer 
for  his  sin.  That  we  are  apt  to  transfer  to  God,  when 
we  use  the  word  wrath  with  reference  to  him.  But 
that  is  never  there.  God  is  not  simply  pained  by 
the  sin,  but  he  is  equally  pained  by  the  suffering 
which  the  sinner  brings  upon  himself  by  his  sin. 

But  all  this  now  suggests  still  another  thought. 
As  Gbd  is  pained  by  the  sufferings  which  the  sinner 
endures  as  a  penalty  for  his  sin  no  less  than  by  the 
sin  itself,  so  he  is  said  to  rush  to  the  sinner's  relief 
with  infinite  compassion  and  with  the  offer  of  a 
free  and  full  forgiveness.  Just  as  there  is  a  self- 
determination  against  sin  of  infinite  intensity,  so 
there  is  a  self-consecration  of  equal  infinite  earnest- 
ness for  the  removal  of  the  sin.  Hence  he  is  repre- 
sented as  running  to  meet  the  returning  prodigal  at 
the  first  resolve  to  turn.  He  is  represented  as  sending 
his  one,  beloved  Son  (Mk.  12:6).  And  that  Son 
is  represented  as  having  come  "  to  minister,  and  to 
give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many  "  (Mk.  10  :  45). 


104<         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

The  Father's  attitude  towards  sin  is,  therefore, 
first  of  all  one  of  self-determination  against  the  sin,  a 
self-determination  which  arrays  against  it  all  the 
infinite  resources  of  his  being;  and  secondly,  it  is 
one  of  absolute  self-consecration  to  the  removal  of 
the  sin,  and  the  salvation  of  the  sinner.  So  long  as 
the  sinner  remains  impenitent  and  holds  on  to  the 
sin,  so  long  he  suffers  under  its  just  penalty;  and 
if  he  ever  reaches  the  point  where  he  says  to  his  sin, 
"  Evil  be  thou  my  good,"  so  that  the  sin  becomes 
an  eternal  fact  in  his  being,  the  penalty  becomes 
eternal  likewise  (Mk.  3:29).  But  whenever  he 
turns  from  the  sin,  no  matter  where  or  how  far 
down  the  steep  incline  he  may  be,  the  Father's  help 
is  near,  and  he  has  the  gracious  promise  of  a  free 
and  full  forgiveness. 

5.    God's  Presence 

The  way  in  which  God's  love  is  thus  said  to  be 
exercised  suggests,  in  the  next  place,  the  thought  of 
his  continual  presence  with  men.  He  is  not  a  dis- 
tant, transcendent  deity  who  knows  of  what  is  taking 
place  among  men  only  through  the  mediation  of 
angels,  and  who  governs  the  earth  and  its  inhab- 
itants only  through  a  host  of  intermediary  beings 
whom  he  sends  forth  to  do  his  will.  He  knows  us 
even  to  the  smallest  minutiae  of  our  being.  "  Your 
Father  knoweth  what  things  ye  have  need  of,  before 
ye  ask  him"  (Mt.  6:8).     As  he  knows  us  and  all 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  105 

our  wants,  so  he  also  watches  over  us  in  such  an  im- 
mediate, beneficent  manner  that  nothing  can  happen 
to  us  contrary  to  his  holy  will.  "  Are  not  two 
sparrows  sold  for  a  penny  ?  and  not  one  of  them  shall 
fall  on  the  ground  without  your  Father:  but  the 
very  hairs  of  your  head  are  all  numbered"  (Mt. 
10:29,  30).  Because  he  knows  us  thus  intimately, 
and  because  he  thus  watches  over  us,  we  may  rely 
upon  him  to  care  for  us,  and  to  provide  for  us  all 
needed  good. 

In  the  Old  Testament  Job  is  represented  as  utter- 
ing the  plaintive  cry, 

"Oh  that  I  knew  where  I  might  find  him! 
That  I  might  come  even  to  his  seat !  " 

(Job  23:3.) 

And  again, 

"Behold,  I  go  forward,  but  he  is  not  there; 
And  backward,  but  I  can  not  perceive  him; 
On  the  left  hand  where  he  doth  work,  but    can  not  behold 

him; 
He  hideth  himself  on  the  right  hand,  that  I  can  not  see 
him." 

(Job  23:8,  9.) 

And  that  is  not  the  sole  instance  where  we  have 
such  a  representation;  it  expresses  rather  the  uni- 
form conception  of  the  Old  Testament.  Though 
Jehovah  was  thought  of  as  present  in  the  Shekinah, 
that  was  a  symbolical  representation.  God  was 
looked  upon  as  a  God  who  hideth  himself.     "  Verily 


106        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

thou  art  a  God  that  hidest  thyself^  0  God  of  Israel, 
the  Saviour''  (Isa.  45:15).  Jesus,  however,  had  a 
different  conception.  He  had  an  answer  for  Job's 
complaint.  "  But  thou,  when  thou  pray  est,  enter  into 
thine  inner  chamber,  and  having  shut  the  door,  pray 
to  thy  Father  who  is  in  secret,  and  thy  Father  who 
seeth  in  secret  shall  recompense  thee"  (Mt.  6:6). 
That  is,  God  is  near ;  all  that  is  necessary  is  that  we 
should  shut  out  the  world,  and  we  are  in  his  pres- 
ence. 

Jesus  himself  lived  in  the  constant  realization  of 
this  blessed  fact.  The  Fourth  Gospel  represents  him 
as  saying,  '^  And  he  that  sent  me  is  with  me ;  he  hath 
not  left  me  alone"  (Jn.  8:29).  Though  there  is 
no  saying  of  his,  exactly  like  it,  reported  in  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  these  constantly  represent  him  as 
acting  in  that  consciousness.  When,  at  the  beginning 
of  his  Galilean  ministry,  he  was  in  danger  of  being 
overwhelmed  by  the  enthusiastic  attentions  of  men, 
he  rose  up  a  great  while  before  day,  and  went  out 
into  a  desert  place  to  pray  (Mk.  1:35).  When  at 
the  period  of  the  great  Galilean  crisis  the  multitude 
was  ready  to  take  him  by  force  to  make  him  a  king, 
he  went  up  into  the  mountain  to  pray  ( Jn.  6:15; 
Mt.  14:23).  Even  while  he  stood  in  the  midst  of 
the  disciples,  he  would  at  times  stop  speaking,  lift 
his  eyes  to  heaven  in  thanksgiving  or  prayer  (Mt. 
11:  25).  He  lived,  as  it  were,  in  an  atmosphere  in 
which  God  seemed  as  really  present  as  the  air  he 
breathed.     And  he  taught  the  disciples  likewise  to 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  107 

pray  thus,  assuring  them  that,  no  matter  where  they 
might  be,  God  was  present  to  hear  (Mt.  7 :  7-11). 

All  these  representations  emphasize  God's  presence 
in  his  beneficent  goodness  and  love.  There  is,  how- 
ever, also  a  complementary  truth.  As  present,  he 
sees  and  knows,  not  simply  our  wants  and  wishes,  but 
our  sins  and  follies  likewise.  As  his  love  impels 
him  evermore  to  supply  the  former,  so  it  likewise  im- 
pels him  to  remove  the  latter.  As  his  ear  is  open 
to  the  faintest  whisper  of  our  prayer,  so  is  his  just 
resentment  ready  to  exact  the  penalty  for  every  idle 
word  (Mt.  12 :  36).  As  not  a  hair  can  fall  from  our 
heads  without  his  knowledge,  so  can  not  even  the 
smallest  deed  of  unkindness  be  committed  without 
his  notice  (Mt.  25:45). 

6.    The  Onginality  of  Jesus'  Conception 

We  need  not  enlarge  on  the  sublimity  of  this  con- 
ception of  Giod.  There  is  none  higher  or  more 
worthy.  The  question,  however,  remains,  to  what 
extent  is  it  original  with  Jesus  ? 

'No  less  an  authority  than  Professor  Bernhard 
Weiss  says,  "  Jesus  brings  no  new  theology ;  the  God 
of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  is  his  God/'  ^  Pro- 
fessor Willibald  Beyschlag  speaks  of  this  as  a  mis- 
understanding, and  adds,  ^'  All  ISFew  Testament 
viewfe  are,  of  course,  as  already  remarked,  rooted  in 
the  Old  Testament.     But  they  only  come  to  flower 

^New  Test.  Theol,  Vol.  I,  p.  64 


108        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

in  the  New  Testament,  and  in  relation  to  their  Old 
Testament  stage  of  development  they  appear  as  really 
new."  ^  Professor  Wendt  says,  ''  Speaking  para- 
doxically, we  can  say  that  Jesus  taught  no  new  doc- 
trine of  God,  but  adopted  and  built  upon  the  Old 
Testament  Jewish  view;  and,  at  the  same  time,  that 
his  conception  of  God  stands  on  a  specifically  higher 
level  than  the  Jewish  view;  and  that  in  the  dis- 
tinctive peculiarity  of  that  conception  lay  the  root 
of  all  the  new  elements  of  his  teaching,  and  of  the 
whole  divergence  of  the  Christian  religion  from  that 
of  the  Old  Testament."  ' 

There  can  be  no  question  about  the  fact  that  Jesus 
built  on  the  Old  Testament.  God  was  called  Father 
by  the  prophets  in  many  a  noble  passage.  Even  the 
Greeks,  from  Homer's  day  on  down,  had  spoken  of 
Zeus  as  "  the  father  of  men  and  of  gods."  But  it 
is  to  be  observed  that  the  conception  nowhere  reaches 
either  the  height  or  the  depth  which  we  find  in  the 
teaching  of  Jesus.  As  above  indicated,  Malachi  in 
2 :  10  speaks  of  God  as  the  Father  of  Israel,  but  it 
is  of  Israel  only,  and  that  because  he  had  created 
them.  The  same  holds  true  of  such  beautiful  refer- 
ences to  God's  Fatherhood  as  those  in  Exodus  4:22; 
Hosea  11 : 1 ;  Isaiah  63  :  16 ;  Jeremiah  31 :  20.  They 
all  conceive  of  God  as  the  Father  of  Israel,  and  of 
Israel  only.  He  is  also  spoken  of  as  the  Father  of 
the  theocratic  King    (Ps.   2:7);   and  even  of  the 

^  'New  Test.  Theol,  Vol.  I,  p.  80. 

2  The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  Vol.  I,  p.  184. 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  109 

pious  Israelite  (Ps.  103:13).  Even  such  passages 
as  Ecclus.  23 : 1,  4,  and  Wisdom  14 :  3  do  not  go 
beyond  this.  There  is  no  intimation  that  any  one 
before  Jesus  ever  thought  of  God  as  the  Father  of 
the  Gentiles  as  well  as  of  the  Jews,  and  much  less 
that  he  can  be  the  Father  of  the  unthankful  and  evil 
as  well  as  of  the  good  and  the  just. 

The  conception  of  Jesus,  therefore,  is  original  in 
this  that  he  first  of  all  apprehended  in  his  own  ex- 
perience all  that  is  involved  in  the  ethical  content  of 
God's  Fatherhood.  He  was  the  first  one  to  appre- 
hend to  the  full  what  is  implied  in  that  personal  rela- 
tionship which  is  expressed  in  the  names  Father  and 
Son;  and,  as  thus  apprehending  fully  the  character 
which  the  name  Father  implies,  he  was  the  first  to 
see  and  teach  the  boundless  love  which  it  expresses. 
While  he  did  not  teach  any  new  name  for  God,  and 
while  he  built  on  the  Old  Testament  conception  of 
Jehovah,  as  the  God  and  Father  of  Israel,  he  filled 
the  name  with  a  new  and  higher  content,  so  that  now 
all  men  may  come  and  address  him  as  "  Our  Father." 

The  originality  of  Jesus'  conception  is  seen  still 
further  in  what  he  taught  of  God's  presence.  He 
lived  as  if  he  were  everywhere  with  the  Father.  All 
he  needed  to  do  was  to  lift  his  eyes,  and  he  was  able 
to  look  into  the  Father's  face,  and  to  hold  communion 
with  him.  In  a  measure  this  was  true  of  the  greatest 
of  the  Old  Testament  prophets ;  and  yet  they  needed 
visible  symbols  to  represent  God's  presence  with 
them,  such  as  the  pillar  of  cloud  by  day  and  the  pillar 


110        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

of  fire  by  night,  and  the  Shekinah.  Their  idea  of 
holiness  implied  God's  separateness  from  the  sinful 
world ;  and  as  their  history  unfolded  they  emphasized 
the  idea  ever  more  and  more,  until  finally  they  could 
think  of  his  governing  the  v^orld  only  through  a  host 
of  intermediary  beings,  such  as  the  angels.  They 
thought  of  him  as  exalted  far  above  all  heavens,  while 
they  tried  to  bridge  the  chasm  which  separated  him 
from  the  world  by  the  idea  of  the  angels  ascending 
and  descending.  But  Jesus  brought  in  a  new  con- 
ception. Eor  him  Gk)d  was  always  near.  And  he 
taught  that  he  is  near  to  us.  We  may  speak  to  him 
anywhere  and  everywhere,  whenever  we  can  muster 
strength  to  shut  out  the  world  from  our  eyes  and 
hearts. 

We  often  hear  it  said  that  one  of  the  characteristics 
of  the  modern  conception  of  God,  as  contrasted  with 
that  of  the  past,  is  the  idea  of  the  divine  immanence. 
The  ancients,  especially  the  Jews,  emphasized  his 
transcendence.  That  has  been  the  vice  of  much  of 
our  so-called  Christian  theology;  and  one  of  the 
hopeful  signs  of  the  times  is  that  theologians  and 
philosophers  have  come  to  emphasize  the  divine  im- 
manence. But  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  divine  im- 
manence was  first  of  all  a  Christian  experience ;  and 
it  entered  into  men's  thinking  only  after  it  had  long 
been  a  matter  of  experience.  The  experience,  more- 
over, was  first  of  all  that  of  Jesus;  and  the  idea 
entered  into  the  world  of  thought  through  his  teach- 
ing.   It  is  true,  the  philosophical  form  in  which  the 


THE  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD  111 

conception  is  now  usually  presented  is  not  found  in 
him;  for  he  was  not  a  philosopher.  But  a  philo- 
sophical concept  is  valid  only  when  it  rests  upon  a 
genuine  human  experience ;  and  in  that  way,  all  that 
has  been  so  learnedly  written  in  modern  philosophy 
and  theology  about  God's  immanence  is  really  found 
in  the  gospel  of  Jesus. 


K 

THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN 

PROEESSOE  A.  B.  BEUCE  has  called  atten- 
tion to  the  close  connection  between  Christ's 
doctrine  of  God  and  his  doctrine  of  man. 
*'  Every  doctrine  of  God,"  he  says,  ^'  has  its  con- 
gruous doctrine  of  man."  ^  Unworthy  views  of  God 
lead  to  degrading  views  of  man.  No  one  ever  real- 
ized this  more  fully  than  Paul.  In  the  first  chapter 
of  his  epistle  to  the  Romans,  he  has  pointed  out  how 
the  heathen's  unwillingness  to  have  God  in  their 
knowledge  led  to  all  forms  of  idolatry,  and  how  this 
led  to  all  sorts  of  shameful  excesses.  They  had 
"  changed  the  glory  of  the  incorruptible  God  for  the 
likeness  of  an  image  of  corruptible  man,  and  of  birds, 
and  fourfooted  beasts,  and  creeping  things " ;  and 
therefore  "God  gave  them  up  in  the  lusts  of  their 
hearts  unto  uncleanness,  that  their  bodies  should  be 
dishonoured  among  themselves"  (Rom.  1:23,  24). 
And  the  opposite  is  equally  true.  Exalted  views  of 
God  beget  exalted  views  of  human  life.  As  the  de- 
graded views,  which  the  heathen  had  of  God,  led  to 
the  beastly  abominations  of  heathen  morality ;  so  has 
the  Christian  conception  of  God,  as  our  Father,  grad- 

*  The  Kingdom  of  God,  p.  128. 
112 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  113 

ually  transformed  man's  estimate  of  himself.  It  has 
given  us  a  new  conception  of  the  worth  of  human 
life,  and  thus  broken  the  shackels  of  the  slave,  opened 
the  doors  of  the  prison-house,  and  set  the  captive 
free. 

1.    The  Inestimable  Value  of  Human  Life 

We  hence  naturally  pass  from  Jesus'  conception 
of  God  to  his  estimate  of  man.  The  two  are  so 
closely  related  that  it  is  impossible  to  form  an  ade- 
quate idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God  without  a  reference 
to  both.  His  exalted  view  of  God  requires  an  equally 
lofty  estimate  of  the  worth  of  man. 

Our  starting-point  here  is  the  idea  of  God's  uni- 
versal Fatherhood.  If  he  is  the  Father  of  all  men, 
then  all  men  must  be  his  kin,  fitted  by  their  very 
nature  to  become  his  children.  While  God  cares  for 
the  birds  of  heaven,  so  that  not  a  sparrow  can  fall 
to  the  ground  without  his  knowledge  and  will  (Mt. 
10:  29),  he  loves  those  who  are  called  to  be  his  chil- 
dren. "  Fear  not  therefore :  ye  are  of  more  value 
than  many  sparrows  "  (Mt.  10  :  31).  Love  can  exirt 
only  between  personalities.  In  the  very  nature  of 
the  case,  God  can  not  love  a  stone  or  a  beast ;  he  loves 
those  only  who  are  created  in  his  image,  and  who  are 
sharers  with  him  of  the  attributes  of  reason  and  will. 
And  when  we  are  told  that  God  loves  us,  that  he  loves 
all  men,  the  unthankful  and  evil,  as  well  as  the  good 
and  gentle  (Lk.  6:  35),  man  as  man  is  exalted  far 
above  all  creatures. 


114*        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

In  bis  dealings  with  men,  Jesus  always  acted  on 
this  principle.  All  his  acts  show  that  he  had  a  pro- 
found respect  for  human  nature  as  such.  For  him 
human  life  was  a  sacred  thing.  No  cry  of  distress 
ever  reached  his  ear  without  awakening  in  him  the 
tenderest  compassion.  In  his  eyes  the  meanest  was 
worthy  of  being  saved.  He  found  in  human  life 
everywhere  a  w^orth  which  called  forth  his  profound- 
est  sympathy.  This  is  seen  in  the  manner  in  which 
he  dealt  with  men,  especially  in  the  way  in  which  he 
bore  himself  with  reference  to  the  children,  the  poor, 
and  the  outcast. 

It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  Jesus  discovered 
the  child.  When  anxious  mothers  brought  their  little 
ones  to  him  that  he  might  lay  his  hands  upon  them 
and  bless  them,  the  disciples  thought  it  an  unseemly 
interference  with  his  precious  time,  and  they  re- 
buked the  mothers.  Jesus  had  a  different  mind.  He 
said,  "  Suffer  the  little  children  to  come  unto  me ; 
forbid  them  not:  for  to  such  belongeth  the  kingdom 
of  God"  (Mk.  10:14).  In  the  little  children  he 
found  the  disposition  which  is  needed  for  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.  Hence  he  added,  ^'  Verily  I  say  unto 
you.  Whosoever  shall  not  receive  the  kingdom  of  God 
as  a  little  child,  he  shall  in  no  wise  enter  therein '' 
(Mk.  10:15).  The  nature  of  the  child,  imspoiled 
by  selfishness  and  sin,  has  the  disposition  which  fits 
one  for  fellowship  with  the  living  God.  And  hence 
also  little  children  are  said  to  be  the  special  objects 
of  God's  care.    "  See  that  ye  despise  not  one  of  these 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  115 

little  ones :  for  I  say  unto  you,  that  in  heaven  their 
angels  do  always  behold  the  face  of  my  Father  who 
is  in  heaven''  (Mt.  18:10).  That  is  sometimes 
taken  as  teaching  the  doctrine  of  guardian  angels, 
implying  that  there  is  a  special  angel  appointed  over 
each  little  child  to  watch  over  it  and  to  guide  it 
through  life.  The  interpretation  has  been  chal- 
lenged ;  and  we  believe  with  good  reason.  The  least, 
however,  that  it  can  mean  is  that  little  children  are 
the  special  objects  of  God's  care.  He  watches  over 
them  with  the  tenderest  care;  and  that  because  of 
the  value  which  every  child  has  in  his  sight. 

Another  indication  of  the  value  which  Jesus  placed 
upon  human  life  is  found  in  the  manner  in  which  he 
dealt  with  the  poor.  It  was  not  an  accident  that  he 
himself  was  poor,  and  that  he  chose  his  disciples 
from  those  in  humble  circumstances.  In  them  he 
found  humanity  stripped  of  adventitious  circum- 
stances. The  world  notices  a  man,  when  he  is  clothed 
with  influence,  position,  or  power.  A  mere  man, 
without  distinctions  of  any  kind,  does  not  count  for 
much  in  the  social  scale.  The  world  estimates  a  man 
by  what  he  has,  or  by  what  he  has  attained,  rather 
than  by  what  he  is.  The  estimate  of  Jesus  was  dif- 
ferent. He  said,  "  Blessed  are  ye  poor :  for  yours 
is  the  kingdom  of  heaven  "  (Lk.  6  :  20).  And  this, 
not  because  Jesus  was  an  ascetic,  and  found  moral 
value  in  poverty  as  such ;  but  because  he  found  value 
in  human  nature,  and  because  human  nature,  which 
is  so  much  more  valuable  than  all  else,  is  so  apt  to 


116        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

be  hidden  by  the  cares,  and  the  riches,  and  the  pleas- 
ures of  this  life. 

The  fact  under  consideration  is  emphasized  still 
further  by  Jesus'  attitude  towards  sinners.  Honest 
poverty  may,  and  often  does,  win  respect;  but  when 
character  is  gone,  all  is  gone.  The  world  as  such  has 
no  care  or  respect  for  the  man  who  is  down;  all  it 
has  to  give  him  is  blows  to  send  him  further  down 
the  steep  declivity  of  his  fall.  Jesus  w^as  ''  the 
friend  of  publicans  and  sinners  "  (Mt.  11 :  19).  He 
received  the  outcast  and  ate  with  them.  That  was, 
indeed,  at  first  a  cause  of  offence,  and  especially  the 
Pharisees  counted  it  a  reproach  against  him.  But 
that  term,  "  the  friend  of  publicans  and  sinners,"  has 
long  since  been  woven  by  a  grateful  humanity  into 
a  chaplet  in  his  crown  of  glory.  The  Christian 
world  now  honours  him  for  receiving  sinners  and 
eating  with  them;  but  it  is  because  we  have  come 
to  know  something  of  the  motive  which  lay  back  of 
his  act.  He  received  them,  because  he  knew  what 
possibilities  lay  hidden  beneath  even  the  most  de- 
graded. He  saw  their  humanity,  so  precious  in  God's 
sight,  and  what  may  be  made  out  of  it,  when  re- 
deemed from  sin  and  death.  That  explains  a  number 
of  his  sayings.  "  For  the  Son  of  man  came  to  seek 
and  to  save  that  which  was  lost"  (Lk.  19:10). 
^^How  think  ye?  if  a  man  have  a  hundred  sheep, 
and  one  of  them  be  gone  astray,  doth  he  not  leave 
the  ninety  and  nine,  and  go  into  the  mountain,  and 
seek  that  which  is  gone  astray?  "  (Mt.  18:  12).     It 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  117 

is  true,  many  who  were  called  sinners  in  his  day 
were  so  principally  when  viewed  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  self-righteous  Pharisees.  In  reality,  many  of 
them  were  far  nearer  the  true  standard  of  righteous- 
ness than  the  scribes  and  Pharisees,  who  so  severely 
condemned  them ;  and  part  of  Jesus'  attitude  towards 
them  is  to  be  explained  by  that  fact.  He  abhorred 
the  complacent  self-righteousness  of  the  Pharisees, 
and  he  denounced  it  as  he  did  nothing  else.  But 
when  due  allowance  is  made  for  that,  the  fact  remains 
that  he  received  sinners  who  were  really  such.  He 
knew  the  character  of  the  woman,  who  anointed  his 
feet  in  Simon's  house.  He  knew  it  as  well  as  Simon 
himself,  who  censured  him  for  allowing  her  to  touch 
him ;  and  he  knew  her  much  better  than  Simon  did. 
He  knew  her  guilty  past;  but  he  also  had  insight 
to  recognize  the  penitence  of  her  sad  present;  and 
seeing  the  infinite  value  of  her  immortal  soul,  which 
had  hitherto  been  covered  and  concealed  by  her  sin 
and  shame,  he  turned  to  her  and  said,  "  Thy  sins  are 
forgiven.  .  .  .  Thy  faith  hath  saved  thee;  go  in 
peace"  (Lk.  7:48,  50). 

And  with  all  this  agrees  what  Jesus  has  expressly 
taught.  "  For  what  shall  it  profit  a  man,  if  he 
gain  the  whole  world,  and  forfeit  his  life?  or  what 
shall  a  man  give  in  exchange  for  his  life  ? "  (Mt. 
16:  26).  Modem  science  has  taught  us  to  look  upon 
man  as  the  product  of  a  long  line  of  evolution,  as 
the  crown  and  culmination  of  the  entire  creative 
process.     All  below  him  has  existed  in  order  that 


118        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

lie  might  come  to  be ;  and  hence  all  below  him  exists 
for  his  benefit  and  use.  Jesus  was,  of  course,  not 
an  evolutionist;  but  he  had  taught  the  same  truth 
long  before  the  modern  idea  of  evolution  was  con- 
ceived; only  he  put  it  into  a  concrete  and  poetic 
form.  He  put  a  single  human  life  into  one  side 
of  the  balance,  and  he  placed  the  whole  world  into 
the  other;  and  he  gave  it  as  his  judgment  that  the 
one  human  life  is  worth  more  than  all  the  world 
besides. 

2.    Evil  and  Lost 

While  Jesus  thus  appraised  human  life  at  its  true 
value,  as  more  precious  in  G-od's  sight  than  all  the 
rest  of  the  creation,  he  did  not  deceive  himself  or 
us  as  to  its  actual  condition.  He  himself  described 
men,  even  the  best  of  them,  as  evil  and  lost.  "  If 
ye  then,  being  evil,  know  how  to  give  good  gifts  to 
your  children,  how  much  more  shall  your  heavenly 
Father  give  good  things  to  them  that  ask  him  "  (Mt. 
7: 11).  "  For  the  Son  of  man  came  to  seek  and  to 
save  that  which  was  lost"  (Lk.  19:10).  "I  was 
not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of 
Israel"  (Mt.  15:24).  To  ascertain  what  Jesus 
thought  of  man  in  his  present  actual  condition,  we 
must  try  to  find  out  what  he  meant  by  these  two 
terms,  "  evil  "  and  '^  lost." 

ISTow,  the  word;,  which  is  translated  "  evil "  in 
Matthew  7: 11,  isnovjjpoi^the  same  as  that  employed 
in  the  sixth  petition  of  the  Lord's  prayer  (Mt.  6 :  13), 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  119 

and  which  both  Eevised  and  Standard  Versions  trans- 
late ''  the  evil  one."  It  is  the  same  also  as  that  which 
is  used  of  Satan  in  the  parable  of  the  Sower  (Mt. 
13:19).  It  can  have  only  one  connotation.  It 
means,  If  ye  then,  being  morally  evil,  know  how  to 
give  good  gifts,  etc.  And  inasmuch  as  the  statement 
was  made  to  the  disciples  as  men,  in  contrast  with  the 
heavenly  Father,  it  must  be  taken  as  expressing  the 
view  which  Jesus  held  of  men  universally. 

It  is  true  that  an  objection  has  been  made  to  this 
interpretation,  on  the  ground  that  the  statement,  in 
which  the  word  is  found,  is  incidental.  It  is  said 
that  we  ought  not  to  found  so  important  a  doctrine 
on  a  passing  remark.  But  it  is  to  be  observed  that 
the  very  fact  that  the  word  fell  from  the  lips  of  Jesus 
incidentally,  when  he  was  illustrating  another  truth, 
adds  to  its  impressiveness  rather  than  the  reverse. 
Jesus  was  teaching  the  disciples  on  the  subject  of 
prayer.  He  had  encouraged  them  to  ask  of  God,  with 
the  assurance  that  their  prayers  would  be  heard.  To 
enforce  the  lesson,  he  appealed  to  their  own  experi- 
ence. "  Or  what  man  is  there  among  you,  who,  if 
his  son  ask  him  for  a  loaf,  will  he  give  him  a  stone ; 
or  if  he  shall  ask  for  a  fish,  will  he  give  him  a 
serpent  ? "  And  then,  to  give  point  to  his  com- 
parison, he  said,  "  If  ye  then,  being  evil,  know  how 
to  give  good  gifts  unto  your  children,  how  much 
more  shall  your  Father  who  is  in  heaven  give  good 
things  to  them  that  ask  him  ?  "  The  very  point  of 
the  comparison  lies  in  the  contrast  between  what  God 


120        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

is  and  what  man  is.  God  is  good;  man  is  evil:  if 
man  who  is  evil  gives  good  gifts,  how  much  more 
will  God  who  is  good  ? 

When  Jesus  was  illustrating  the  place  of  the  dis- 
ciples in  the  world,  he  used  two  expressions,  which 
imply  the  same  thing  with  reference  to  mankind. 
"  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth  ''  (Mt.  5: 13).  The 
point  in  the  metaphor  lies  in  the  use  which  is  made 
of  salt.  It  is  a  preserving  agent.  It  keeps  food 
from  decaying.  Similarly  the  disciples,  as  the  em- 
bodiment of  the  Christian  character,  are  a  preserving 
power  in  the  midst  of  a  wicked  and  corrupt  world. 
The  world  as  such  is  corrupt.  Left  to  itself  it  will 
decay  and  perish.  And  very  much  the  same  thought 
is  implied  in  the  statement  which  follows :  "  Ye  are 
the  light  of  the  world''  (Mt.  5:  14).  The  world 
is  in  darkness.  It  needs  illumination.  And  dark- 
ness is  but  a  metaphor  for  sin  and  evil. 

Jesus  likewise  spoke  of  man  as  "  lost "  (Lk. 
19: 10).  It  is  true,  the  word  does  not  occur  often 
in  his  teaching ;  but  it  is  found  often  enough  to  indi- 
cate that  he  looked  upon  man,  in  his  present  condi- 
tion, as  lost.    What  did  he  mean  by  it  ? 

There  has  been  a  tendency  to  use  the  word  in  a 
sense  which  implies  far  more  than  Jesus  meant  by 
it.  Often  the  lost  are  taken  to  be  those  who  are 
irrecoverably  and  irretrievably  lost,  who  have  been 
condemned  to  everlasting  perdition.  One  only  needs 
to  note  the  connection  in  which  Jesus  used  the  word 
to  be  assured  that  that  is  not  the  sense  in  which  he 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  121 

employed  it.  He  meant  that  man  had  gone  astray, 
like  the  lost  sheep  (Lk.  15:  6)  ;  that  he  had  fallen 
from  his  place,  like  the  lost  coin  (Lk.  15:8);  that 
he  had  left  and  forfeited  his  place  in  the  Father's 
house,  like  the  lost  son  (Lk.  15 :  24)  ;  hut  each  of 
the  parables,  just  referred  to,  implies  that  his  con- 
dition was  not  hopeless  nor  beyond  the  possibility  of 
recovery.  The  lost  sheep  was  found,  the  lost  coin 
was  recovered,  and  the  lost  son  returned  and  was 
restored  to  his  former  place  in  the  father's  house. 
1^0  doubt,  Jesus  meant  to  convey  the  idea  that  in 
his  lost  state,  man  is  in  an  unfortunate  and  unhappy 
condition;  and  the  representation  implies  further 
that  he  can  not  of  himself  find  his  way  back  to  the 
state  from  which  he  has  fallen.  He  can  not,  by  any 
power  which  he  has  in  himself,  recover  what  he  has 
so  insanely  thrown  away  in  his  pursuit  of  illicit  and 
unnatural  pleasures.  The  best  that  the  lost  son 
could  think  for  himself  was  a  place  among  the  hired 
servants.  But  he  was  not  irrecoverably  lost.  He 
was  in  a  condition  from  which  he  might  still  be 
saved ;  yet  he  was  in  a  condition  in  which  he  needed 
salvation;  and  that  is  the  point  especially  to  be 
noted. 

3.    The  Depth  of  the  Depravity 

To  what  extent  did  Jesus  conceive  of  man  as  evil 
and  lost  ?  In  our  creeds,  confessions,  and  theologies, 
we  find  much  on  the  subject  of  total  depravity.  Did 
Jesus  teach  that  doctrine?     In  the  passage  above 


122        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

quoted,  Professor  McGiffert  denies  that  Jesus  taught 
that  conception  of  man ;  and  he  finds  here  one  of  his 
main  points  of  difference  between  Jesus  and  Paul. 

Our  answer  depends  very  much  on  the  meaning 
which  we  attach  to  the  idea  of  total  depravity.  Does 
it  mean  that  man's  whole  being  has  become  so  abso- 
lutely depraved  that  there  is  no  least  spark  of  good 
left  in  him,  and  that  he  is  no  longer  able  to  think 
a  good  thought,  to  experience  a  pure  affection,  or 
to  will  a  single  good  deed  ?  It  is  the  meaning  which 
has  often  been  attached  to  it.  But  if  that  is  the 
sense  in  which  the  expression  is  to  be  taken,  then  it 
is  no  doubt  true  that  Jesus  did  not  teach  the  doc- 
trine. Though  it  is  not  within  the  province  of  the 
present  discussion  to  determine  the  Pauline  teaching, 
the  question  may  be  fairly  raised  whether  Paul 
taught  the  doctrine  in  that  sense.  Certainly  Jesus 
did  not ;  for  in  the  passage  above  quoted  (Mt.  7 :  11), 
he  distinctly  implies  the  contrary.  He  puts  the 
being  evil  and  the  giving  of  good  things  side  by  side, 
as  actually  found  in  the  same  individual.  Those 
who  are  evil  by  nature  are  not  simply  capable  of 
doing  good  to  the  extent  of  giving  good  gifts;  but, 
under  the  impulse  of  the  parental  instinct,  they  do 
it  so  habitually  that  Jesus  was  able  to  build  his 
argument  for  the  doctrine  of  prayer  on  it. 

But  if  total  depravity  means  that  the  depravity 
has  extended  to  the  entire  human  race,  and  that  it 
has  so  affected  each  individual  in  it  that  it  has  ex- 
tended to  his  entire  being,  involving  all  his  capacities 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  123 

and  powers,  so  that  there  is  no  part  of  his  being  free 
from  the  taint,  then  the  answer  must  be  different. 

That  Jesus  conceived  all  men  as  evil  and  in  need 
of  pardon  is  evident  from  the  prayer  which  he  has 
taught  us.  Among  the  things,  necessary  for  soul 
and  body,  is  the  forgiveness  of  our  debts  (Mt.  6 :  13). 
And  how  great  those  debts  are,  he  has  illustrated  in 
the  parable  of  the  Unmerciful  Servant  (Mt. 
18 :  23  ff).  That  servant,  in  his  relation  to  his  lord, 
represents  man  in  his  relation  to  God;  just  as  the 
fellow-servant,  in  relation  to  himself,  represents  man 
in  his  relation  to  his  fellow-men.  ISTow,  that  serv- 
ant's debt  was  ten  thousand  talents ;  while  his  fellow- 
servant's  debt  to  himself  was  only  an  hundred  pence. 
The  former  represents  a  debt  which  is  practically 
infinite,  and  which  the  debtor,  when  left  to  his  own 
resources,  can  never  repay.  Such  is  man's  debt  to 
God. 

About  the  time  of  the  great  Galilean  crisis,  Jesus 
was  drawn  into  a  controversy  with  the  Pharisees 
and  certain  of  the  scribes  on  the  subject  of  clean  and 
unclean  meats.  The  Pharisees  had  seen  his  disciples 
eat  bread  with  unwashen  hands ;  and  they  demanded 
of  him,  ^^  Why  walk  not  thy  disciples  according  to 
the  tradition  of  the  elders  ?  "  In  his  vindication  of 
the  disciples,  Jesus  called  attention  to  what  now 
seems  a  self-evident  truth,  namely,  that  the  food 
which  enters  into  a  man  can  not  involve  any  moral 
or  religious  defilement,  for  it  only  concerns  the  body. 
It  does  not  touch  his  inner  moral  and  spiritual  being. 


lU        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

It  enters  the  stomach  and  not  the  heart.  But  then 
Jesus  at  once  pointed  out  whence  moral  and  spiritual 
defilement  really  does  come.  The  things  which  come 
out  of  the  man,  ©ut  of  his  heart,  those  are  the  things 
which  defile  him.  And  in  pointing  out  what  thus 
comes  out  of  the  heart,  he  paints  a  picture  of  human 
depravity  which  has  probably  not  been  equalled  any- 
where in  literature.  ^^  And  he  said  unto  them,  That 
which  proceedeth  out  of  the  heart,  that  defileth  the 
man.  For  from  within,  out  of  the  heart  of  man, 
evil  thoughts  proceed,  fornication,  thefts,  murders, 
adulteries,  covetings,  wickedness,  deceit,  lascivious- 
ness,  an  evil  eye,  railing,  pride,  foolishness :  all  these 
evil  things  proceed  from  within,  and  defile  the  man  " 
(Mk.  7:21-23). 

Now,  the  ^'  heart "  here,  of  course,  means  more 
than  the  feelings  and  the  emotions.  In  our  common 
speech,  that  is  about  all  that  the  expression  signifies. 
But  in  the  'New  Testament,  it  means  much  more. 
It  refers  to  the  inmost  and  deepest  part  of  our  being, 
that  out  of  which  come  the  issues  of  life,  the  source 
and  fountain  of  our  thoughts,  feelings,  and  volitions. 
It  is  equivalent  to  our  inner  moral  and  spiritual 
being.  But  if  that  is  of  such  a  character  that  such 
things  naturally  come  out  of  it,  it  must  be  depraved 
indeed.  Whatever  reminiscences  of  a  former  and 
better  self  may  still  be  found  there  in  connection  with 
our  natural  affections,  the  entire  inner  being  must 
be  so  involved  in  the  evil  which  is  in  human  nature 
that  there  is  no  part  absolutely  clean. 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  U5 

4.    Despairing  of  No  Man. 

But  although  Jesus  thus  regarded  man  as  evil  and 
lost,  he  did  not  look  upon  humanity  as  beyond  the 
possibility  of  redemption.  Indeed,  he  defined  his 
mission  as  that  of  seeking  and  saving  the  lost.  His 
seeking  and  saving  love  is  beautifully  illustrated  in 
the  trilogy  of  parables,  recorded  by  Luke  in  the 
fifteenth  chapter  of  his  Gospel.  And  not  only  do 
those  parables  set  forth  the  idea  of  his  seeking  and 
saving  love;  they  illustrate,  as  far  as  this  can  be 
done  in  a  parabolic  representation,  the  successful 
issue  of  his  redemptive  activity.  The  lost,  in  each 
case,  was  found. 

This  shows  the  optimism  of  Jesus.  Whether  he 
dealt  with  the  individual,  or  whether  he  regarded 
humanity  as  a  whole,  he  always  went  on  the  assump- 
tion that  redemption  was  possible.  I^either  the  bit- 
terest opposition  of  his  Pharisaic  enemies,  nor  the 
most  stubborn  obduracy  of  the  generation  in  which  he 
lived  ever  made  him  lose  faith  in  the  ultimate  tri- 
umph of  his  kingdom.  He  looked  beyond  the  stub- 
born unbelief  of  his  own  people,  and  he  saw  them 
coming  from  the  east  and  the  west,  from  the  north 
and  the  south,  and  sitting  down  with  Abraham,  and 
Isaac,  and  Jacob  in  his  kingdom.  And  in  his  deal- 
ing with  the  individual,  he  never  refused  his  help 
to  any  one,  nor  turned  away  from  any  one,  as  if 
he  were  incapable  of  being  saved.  Publicans  and 
sinners  were  eagerly  welcomed;  and  though  he  re- 


126        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

peatedly  warned  the  scribes  and  Pharisees,  and 
though  he  publicly  denounced  their  hypocrisy  and  sin, 
he  freely  accepted  their  invitation,  sat  down  to  their 
feasts,  and  freely  mingled  with  them,  as  if  he  re- 
garded each  individual  among  them  as  capable  of 
being  saved. 

This  attitude  is  beautifully  brought  out  in  what 
is  probably  the  correct  reading  of  a  saying,  which 
Luke  has  preserved  in  6 :  35.  The  Authorized  Ver- 
sion is  here  no  doubt  incorrect,  as  well  as  unfor- 
tunate. It  renders,  "  But  love  your  enemies,  and 
do  good,  and  lend,  hoping  for  nothing  again."  Both 
the  Revised  and  the  Standard  Versions  say,  "  But 
love  your  enemies,  and  do  them  good,  and  lend, 
never  despairing.''  The  Greek  for  the  last  clause  is 
jxr^Sav  a7ie\7ti8,ovra?.  ^ow,  aTtsXTti^orrs?  does  not 
mean  what  the  Authorized  Version  makes  it  mean; 
it  means  ^'  despairing  " ;  and  with  fJLrjSkv,  it  can  not 
well  mean  anything  but  what  the  Revised  Version 
makes  it  mean,  "  never  despairing."  But  instead  of 
^tfdev,  some  ancient  authorities  read  ^ridh^a,  using 
the  masculine  instead  of  the  neuter;  and  that  may 
be  the  correct  reading.  If  that  reading,  however, 
be  adopted,  then  the  rendering  of  the  Revised  Ver- 
sion in  the  margin  must  be  accepted;  and  that  will 
make  the  passage  read,  "  But  love  your  enemies,  and 
do  them  good,  and  lend,  despairing  of  no  man."  To 
make  the  passage  teach  a  lesson  of  indiscriminate 
lending,  without  the  thought  of  getting  back  what  is 
loaned,  is  beside  the  mark;  but  to  make  it  teach  a 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  127 

lesson  of  confidence  in  human  nature,  and  of  hope- 
fulness of  winning  even  the  most  unworthy  by  con- 
fidence and  love,  is  in  harmony  with  the  teaching 
of  Jesus  elsewhere. 

This  is,  of  course,  not  equivalent  to  the  doctrine 
of  universal  salvation.  That  Jesus  does  not  teach. 
There  is,  at  least,  one  passage  in  which  he  teaches 
the  opposite.  In  his  teaching  concerning  the  sin 
against  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  distinctly  states  that  sin- 
ful character  may  become  a  fixity,  so  that  the  in- 
dividual becomes  guilty  of  eternal  sin  (Mk.  3:29). 
And  if  a  man  may  become  guilty  of  eternal  sin,  his 
sin  has  become  as  permanent  a  factor  in  his  being 
as  that  being  itself.  It  is  the  state  of  final  harden- 
ing, in  which  the  individual,  having  rejected  all  the 
overtures  of  God's  grace,  has  said  to  his  sin,  "  Evil 
be  thou  my  good."  Repentance  is  then  impossible. 
The  individual  can  no  longer  comply  with  the  condi- 
tions requisite  to  forgiveness ;  and  hence  there  is  no 
forgiveness  for  him,  either  in  this  world  or  in  that 
which  is  to  come. 

And  yet  it  is  to  be  observed  that,  while  Jesus 
warned  the  Pharisees  of  the  possibility  of  their  com- 
mitting such  a  sin,  and  that  while  his  warning  im- 
plied that  they  were  dangerously  near  the  brink  of 
that  fearful  catastrophe,  he  dealt  with  them  as  if 
they  might  still  be  saved  from  it. 

Very  much  the  same  may  be  said  with  reference 
to  Judas.  The  time  came,  after  Judas  had  cove- 
nanted with  the  Jews  to  betray  his  Master,  that 


128        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

Jesus  said  of  him,  "  Good  were  it  for  that  man  if 
he  had  not  been  born"  (Mk.  14:21).  That  may 
mean,  probably  does,  that  Judas,  by  his  resistance 
of  the  gracious  influences  which  had  been  at  work 
in  his  life,  had  passed  into  that  condition  of  final 
hardening.  Yet  it  is  to  be  noted  that  Jesus,  even 
then  did  not  discontinue  his  warnings;  neither  did 
he  treat  the  traitor  as  if  he  were  absolutely  without 
hope.  When  they  sat  down  to  the  last  supper  in  the 
upper  room,  Judas  had  already  consummated  his 
agreement  with  the  Sanhedrists;  yet  Jesus  washed 
his  feet  as  lovingly  as  those  of  the  beloved  disciple. 

Again,  when  Jesus  was  about  being  fastened  to 
the  cross,  he  prayed,  ''  Father,  forgive  them ;  for 
they  know  not  what  they  do''  (Lk.  23:  34).  It  is 
true,  that  prayer  has  been  so  construed  as  to  make 
it  refer  only  to  the  ignorant  Roman  soldiers,  who 
were  carrying  out  the  cruel  sentence  for  which  others 
were  guilty.  Thus  Professor  Seeley  says,  "  The 
words  of  forgiveness  uttered  on  the  cross  refer  sim- 
ply to  the  Roman  soldiers,  for  whom  pardon  is  asked 
expressly  on  the  ground  that  they  did  not  understand 
what  they  were  doing.  The  words  may  even  con- 
tain distinct  allusion  to  that  other  class  of  criminals 
who  did  know  what  they  were  doing,  and  for  whom 
therefore  the  same  prayer  was  not  offered."  ^  But 
it  may  well  be  questioned  whether  this  interpretation 
is  correct.  Who  will  say  that  even  Caiaphas  and 
the  Sanhedrists  fully  understood  the  significance  of 

*  Ecce  Homo,  p.  298. 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  1^9 

what  they  were  doing?  They  were  doubtless  com- 
mitting the  darkest  crime  of  all  history ;  and  yet  did 
they  know  who  Jesus  really  was?  And  did  they 
comprehend  what  their  rejection  of  him  signified? 
Assuredly  not ;  and  it  is  far  more  in  accord  with  the 
entire  life  and  conduct  of  Jesus  to  suppose  that  he 
included  all,  who  had  a  part  in  his  condemnation, 
in  his  prayer  for  pardon,  than  to  suppose  that  his 
resentment  was  such  that  he  did  not  pray  for  even 
his  bitterest  enemies.  But  if  he  thus  prayed  for 
them,  it  is  evidence  that  he  was  only  acting  on  his 
own  principle  of  "  despairing  of  no  man.'^ 

Certainly,  we  may  afiirm  one  thing  with  perfect 
confidence.  So  far  as  our  conduct  is  concerned,  we 
are  absolutely  safe  in  following  the  injunction,  ''  de- 
spairing of  no  man.''  Only  he  who  looketh  upon  the 
heart  can  know  whether  or  not  any  given  sinner  has 
passed  the  bounds  whence  he  can  not  be  recovered. 
We  can  not  know  it;  and  the  only  thing  we  can  do 
is  to  deal  with  all  men  as  if  they  were  still  within 
reach  of  love  and  mercy.  It  is,  of  course,  theoretic- 
ally possible  that  some  men  may  have  committed  the 
sin  against  the  Holy  Spirit  in  this  life ;  but  we  lack 
the  discernment  which  enables  us  to  say  with  refer- 
ence to  any  one  that  he  has  done  so. 

6.    Sons  of  God. 

!N'ow,  this  beautiful  optimism  of  elesus  rests  on  his 
insight  into  man's  true  destiny.     Man  is  by  nature 


130        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

God's  kin,  created  in  his  image  and  likeness,  and 
called  to  become  a  son  of  God;  and  Jesus  exhorted 
his  disciples  so  to  live  that  they  might  realize  their 
high  calling.  In  the  passage,  already  quoted,  Jesus 
said,  "Love  your  enemies,  and  pray  for  them  that 
despitef ully  use  you  and  persecute  you :  that  ye  may 
become  (yivrjads)  sons  of  your  Father  which  is  in 
heaven"  (Mt.  5:44,  45). 

The  exhortation  contains  a  paradox.  God  is 
spoken  of  as  "  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven," 
while  the  disciples  are  exhorted  to  imitate  the  Fa- 
ther's love  towards  the  unthankful  and  the  evil  in 
order  that  they  may  become  sons  of  God.  The 
paradox  compels  us  to  return  to  the  question  which 
was  briefly  discussed  in  the  last  chapter.  If  God 
is  the  Father  of  all  men,  as  we  have  the  best  of 
reasons  for  affirming,  can  we  say  that  all  men  are 
sons  of  God  ?  At  first  sight  it  would  seem  that  the 
two  statements  are  correlative,  and  that,  if  the 
former  is  true,  the  latter  must  be  true  likewise.  Yet 
there  is  nothing  clearer  in  the  ^ew  Testament  than 
that  its  several  writers  think  of  the  necessity  of  men 
becoming  sons  of  God.  Thus  in  John  1 :  12,  we  have, 
"  But  as  many  as  received  him,  to  them  gave  he  the 
right  to  become  children  of  God,  even  to  them  that 
believe  on  his  name."  It  is  likewise  the  Pauline  con- 
ception, underlying  all  that  he  has  to  say  on  the 
subject  of  adoption.  "  For  as  many  as  are  led  by 
the  Spirit  of  God,  these  are  the  sons  of  God.  For  ye 
received  not  the  spirit  of  bondage  again  unto  fear; 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  131 

but  ye  received  the  spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we 
cry,  Abba,  Father  ''  (Kom.  8 :  14,  15).  And  that  is 
clearly  the  teaching  of  Jesus  in  the  passage  just 
quoted. 

Of  course,  much  depends  on  the  point  of  view  from 
which  the  subject  is  approached.  As  we  said  above 
of  God's  Fatherhood,  so  we  may  now  say  of  man's 
sonship.  As  it  is  possible  to  speak  of  God  as  Father, 
because  as  Creator  he  is  the  Author  of  our  being; 
so  we  may  speak  of  man  as  God's  son,  because  he  is 
God's  offspring.  We  can,  of  course,  not  define  the 
process  of  creation.  We  do  not  know  how  God  has 
called  us  into  being;  but  the  conception,  which  is 
everywhere  present  in  Scripture,  is  that  we  are  vi- 
tally and  organically  related  to  him,  as  a  child  is  to 
its  parent.  We  were  created  "in  his  image";  we 
are  "  his  offspring  " ;  we  are  '^  partakers  of  the  divine 
nature."  And  because  of  this  relation  it  is  possible 
to  speak  of  our  being  sons  of  God  by  nature.  The 
parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son  may  be  quoted  in  favour 
of  it ;  for  the  prodigal,  though  he  forgot  all  that  he 
owed  to  his  father,  yet  continued  through  all  the 
vicissitudes  of  his  wandering  life  still  to  be  a  son. 
It  was  a  relation  which  no  act  of  disobedience  or 
disloyalty  could  destroy.  And  the  same  may  be  said 
of  our  relation  to  God.  Created  in  his  image,  we 
can  never  by  any  act  of  our  own  destroy  that  orig- 
inal relation  which  is  implied  in  our  being  his  off- 
spring. 

And  yet  this  does  not  say  it  all.     There  is  still 


132        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

another  aspect  under  which  the  subject  may  be 
viewed.  Just  as  Jesus  does  not  make  God's  Father- 
hood rest  on  the  fact  that  he  is  the  Creator  or  that 
we  are  his  offspring,  so  he  does  not  make  our  sonship 
rest  on  our  natural  kinship.  As  he  makes  God's 
Fatherhood  rest  in  his  infinite  goodness  and  love, 
so  does  he  make  our  sonship  depend  on  our  respond- 
ing to  that  love.  And  there  is  a  legitimate  distinc- 
tion between  the  idea  of  offspring  and  that  of  son- 
ship.  The  scion  of  the  oak  is  the  offspring  of  the 
oak,  but  it  is  not  a  son.  So  the  young  of  an  animal 
is  the  offspring  of  the  animal,  but  it  is  not  a  child. 
The  intellectual  and  ethical  elements  which  are  char- 
acteristic of  sonship  are  lacking.  Even  of  the  human 
offspring  w^e  may  say  that  it  needs,  so  to  speak,  a 
second  birth,  before  it  can  really  be  a  son.  It  is  the 
intelligence  beaming  from  the  mother's  eye  that 
awakens  intelligence  in  the  mind  of  the  child.  It  is 
the  warmth  of  her  love,  enveloping  the  child  in  a 
moral  and  spiritual  atmosphere,  that  kindles  the 
flame  of  love  in  its  breast.  And  until  these  higher 
moral  and  spiritual  elements  are  awakened,  the 
mother's  offspring  is  not  really  a  son,  at  least  not  in 
the  highest  and  best  sense.  And  so  of  our  relation 
to  God.  It  is  perfectly  legitimate  to  say  that  we  are 
by  nature  his  offspring,  akin  by  nature  and  made  for 
the  closest  communion  and  fellowship  with  him ;  but 
in  the  higher  sense  we  are  sons  only  when  we  respond 
to  his  love  in  such  a  way  that  we  learn  to  love  our 
enemies  even  as  he  does.     And  this  is  the  point  of 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  1S3 

view  from  which  Jesus  views  the  subject.  Though 
we  are  God's  offspring  by  nature,  we  become  the 
children  of  God  in  the  full,  rich  sense  of  the  term, 
which  enables  us  to  attain  to  the  full  blessedness  and 
the  high  privileges  of  sons,  only  when  we  learn  to 
believe  on  the  Son  and  through  believing  learn  to  love 
as  God  loves. 

Another  fact  needs  to  be  taken  into  consideration. 
It  is  no  doubt  true,  that  the  ideal  relation  between 
God  and  us  is  that  between  father  and  son.  JSTow, 
God  has  realized  his  ideal  fully  and  perfectly.  He 
always  is  what  he  ought  to  be.  Man,  however,  has 
never  yet,  except  in  Jesus,  realized  his  ideal  fully. 
Yea,  and  from  the  very  beginning  he  began  to  realize 
a  contrary  ideal.  In  order  that  he  may  become  what 
he  was  destined  to  be,  that  contrary  ideal  must 
be  broken  down,  and  the  true  ideal  must  be 
realized  in  its  stead.  And  both  require  a  long  and 
tedious  process,  which  is  both  slow  and  painful.  The 
sinner,  who  has  realized  the  contrary  ideal,  has  in 
reality  become  a  son  of  the  evil  one;  and  before  he 
can  become  a  son  of  God,  that  wrong  relation  must 
be  broken  down,  and  a  new  relation  must  be 
formed. 

In  the  passage  under  consideration,  Jesus  has  indi- 
cated how  we  may  thus  become  sons  of  God.  We 
must  allow  the  love  of  God,  which  from  the  begin- 
ning has  enveloped  us  as  with  an  atmosphere  of 
beneficence  and  goodness,  to  awaken  a  like  love  in  us. 
We  must  learn  to  respond  to  that  love ;  and  that  not 


134        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

simply  to  the  extent  of  loving  God,  but  of  loving  all 
men,  even  as  he  does.  And  the  awakening  of  such 
love  in  our  hearts  implies  a  second  birth,  just  as  the 
little  child  must  be  born  again  through  the  beaming 
of  the  mother's  love  upon  it  before  it  can  realize 
its  high  privileges.  Or  in  other  words,  to  become 
sons  of  God  we  must  realize  the  high  ideal  which 
God  has  written  into  our  very  constitution. 

Can  we  realize  that  ideal?  It  may  be  said  in 
reply  that  our  ideals  always  recede  into  the  clouds 
as  we  painfully  climb  upward  to  reach  them;  and 
that  this  is  especially  true  of  this  highest  of  all  our 
ideals.  As  if  Jesus  had  realized  that  such  a  feeling 
might  be  awakened  in  the  bosom  of  the  disciples,  he 
added  a  gracious  promise  to  the  exhortation.  "  Ye 
therefore  shall  be  perfect  as  your  heavenly  Father  is 
perfect ''  (Mt.  5  :  48).  The  Authorized  Version  has 
here  again  obscured  the  meaning  by  giving  us  an 
inadequate  rendering.  It  has  changed  the  promise 
into  a  command,  as  if  Jesus  had  said,  ^'  Be  ye  there- 
fore perfect  as  your  heavenly  Father  is  perfect." 
But  the  Revised  Version  has  undoubtedly  given  us 
the  better  rendering.  The  verb  is  future,  not  an 
imperative.  And  the  meaning  is :  however  much  you 
may  seem  to  fall  short  of  your  highest  ideal  now,  be 
not  discouraged.  You  have  all  eternity  before  you ; 
and,  if  you  keep  on  trying,  exercising  love  under 
whatever  trying  circumstances  may  confront  you 
now,  by  and  by  you  shall  be  perfect,  as  your  heav- 
enly Father  is  perfect.    Then  you  will  have  realized 


THE  ESTIMATE  OF  MAN  135 

the  ideal  of  your  being;  then  yon  will  be  sons  of 
God,  in  the  fullest,  highest  sense. 

It  is  in  this  thought  that  the  teaching  of  Jesus 
with  reference  to  the  worth  of  man  reaches  its  cul- 
mination. Man,  created  in  the  image  of  God,  fitted 
by  nature  to  live  in  communion  and  fellowship  with 
him,  by  responding  to  his  love,  will  by  and  by  attain 
unto  that  for  which  he  was  created.  And  because 
of  this  fact,  a  man  is  of  such  inestimable  worth, 
that,  when  a  single  soul  is  put  into  the  one  side  of 
the  balance  with  all  the  world  in  the  other,  it  is 
seen  to  be  of  more  value  than  all  else. 


VI 
THE  Ki:t^GDOM  OF  GOD 

RICH  and  diversified  as  the  teaching  of  Jesus 
is,  it  ultimately  revolves  round  a  single  con- 
ception. That  is  the  kingdom  of  God.  With 
that  he  began  his  preaching  in  Galilee  (Mk.  1:15); 
with  that  he  was  still  occupied,  when  he  sat  with 
the  disciples  at  the  last  supper  (Mk.  14:25);  and 
of  that  he  is  said  to  have  spoken  after  the  resurrec- 
tion (Acts  1:6).  Around  it  may  be  grouped  all  the 
topics  that  still  claim  our  attention  in  the  study  of 
his  teaching. 

That  Jesus,  in  choosing  this  as  the  central  theme 
of  his  teaching,  made  use  of  a  conception  which  was 
familiar  to  the  people  of  his  day,  there  can  be  no 
doubt.  The  Old  Testament  is  full  of  the  idea  of 
God  as  King,  of  his  reign  over  his  chosen  people, 
and  of  the  kingdom  which  he  would  establish  among 
men ;  so  that  the  idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God  can  not 
have  been  new  to  the  people  to  whom  Jesus  delivered 
his  message.  The  only  question  which  is  open  for 
discussion  is,  to  what  extent  is  the  teaching  of  Jesus 
on  this  subject  new?  To  what  extent  may  it  be 
found  in  the  writings  of  the  prophets  ?  As  was  to 
have  been  expected,  different  views  have  been  held. 

136 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  137 

There  are  those  who  have  tried  to  reduce  to  a  min- 
imum the  difference  between  the  teaching  of  Jesus 
and  the  Old  Testament.  These  have  sought  to  find 
all  the  elements  of  what  he  said  on  the  subject  in 
the  Scriptures  and  in  contemporary  literature. 
Others  have  magnified  the  difference,  and  made  small 
account  of  the  background  on  which  his  teaching 
rests.  They  have  gone  immediately  to  his  words,  and 
have  deemed  it  enough  to  study  what  he  himself  has 
said.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  here  the  golden 
mean  holds  the  truth.  Jesus  started  with  a  concep- 
tion which  was  familiar  to  his  contemporaries;  he 
dealt  with  a  subject  for  which  the  people  had  had  a 
long  preparation,  and  with  reference  to  which  they 
were  in  constant  expectation  (Lk.  3:15);  but  he 
filled  the  familiar  conception  with  a  new  content,  so 
that  the  majority  of  men  who  heard  him  failed  to 
recognize  the  kingdom,  for  which  they  had  been  led 
to  look  and  long,  in  the  picture  which  he  painted. 

It  will  be  to  our  advantage,  therefore,  first  of  all 
to  recall  briefly  the  Old  Testament  conception  of  God 
as  King,  of  his  reign  over  men,  and  how  far  even 
that  conception  had  been  misapprehended  by  the 
Jews  of  our  Saviour's  day. 

1.    TTie  Old  Testament  Basis 

That  God  is  sovereign  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth  is 
an  idea  which  runs  all  the  way  through  the  Old 
Testament.    The  idea  lies  back  of  the  creation  story. 


138         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

The  Almighty  Maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  his  gov- 
ernment is  over  all. 

"Jehovah  hath  established  his  throne  in  the  heavens; 
And  his  kingdom  ruleth  over  all." 

(Ps.  103:19.) 

The  one  hundred  and  fourth  Psalm  is  a  beautiful 
poetical  expression  of  just  this  idea.  In  an  impor- 
tant sense,  the  idea  of  God's  kingdom  is  laid  deep 
down  in  nature.  And  to  this  conception  of  the  an- 
cient Hebrews,  all  modern  science  cheerfully  sub- 
scribes, at  least,  ail  science  which  acknowledges  an 
intelligent  Creator;  for  the  laws  of  nature  are  but 
the  expression  of  his  immanent  reason  and  will,  and 
not  even  the  minutest  atom  moves  or  exists  except 
in  obedience  to  law. 

But  God's  reign  in  nature  is  but  a  distant  analogy 
of  his  reign  in  human  hearts.  In  nature  all  is  in 
obedience  to  fixed  and  undeviating  law.  The  stars 
in  their  courses  yield  a  blind  obedience  to  their 
Maker ;  for  they  have  neither  reason  nor  will,  neither 
intelligence  nor  freedom.  It  is  only  in  the  realm  of 
freedom  that  God  becomes  a  sovereign  worthy  of  his 
great  and  excellent  name.  But  according  to  the  Old 
Testament,  no  sooner  had  the  creative  process  en- 
tered upon  the  stage  where  freedom  reigned,  than 
God's  will  was  disobeyed.  Sin  entered,  and  marred 
the  beauty  and  harmony  which  had  hitherto  char- 
acterized the  creation.  Yet  God  found  a  way  to 
reassert  his  sovereignty.     Through  the  redemptive 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  139 

processes,  which  were  instituted  immediately  after 
the  Fall  (Gen.  3 :  15),  he  began  to  find  his  way  into 
the  hearts  of  men,  and  gradually  to  lead  them  to  an 
acknowledgTuent  of  his  gracious  purposes.  It  is  true, 
the  movement  seems  for  centuries  to  have  been  one 
of  exclusion,  in  which  he  chose  his  instruments  from 
among  those  who  were  susceptible,  and  in  which  he 
seems  to  have  passed  by  the  great  masses  of  mankind. 
But  his  chosen  ones  were  in  each  case  his  servants, 
who  like  Abraham  were  blessed  in  order  that  they 
might  become  a  blessing  to  all  nations  (Gen.  12 : 1-3). 

Without  attempting  to  follow  the  process  by  which 
through  his  providence  God  is  thus  represented  as 
preparing  a  people  for  himself,  through  whom  his 
will  and  purposes  might  be  accomplished,  we  note 
that  the  Old  Testament  conceived  of  that  people  as 
God's  heritage  and,  as  such,  in  a  peculiar  manner 
under  his  government  and  guidance.  First  Moses, 
the  lawgiver,  was  regarded  as  Jehovah's  representa- 
tive; and  the  laws,  which  he  enacted,  were  looked 
upon  as  God's  laws.  The  judges  all  claimed  to  exe- 
cute his  will.  The  kings  afterwards,  especially 
David  and  his  house,  were  looked  upon  as  his  vice- 
gerents ;  and  their  failures,  as  well  as  the  calamities 
of  the  people,  are  uniformly  traced  to  disobedience 
of  his  laws.  To  borrow  the  word,  which  seems  first 
to  have  been  used  in  this  connection  by  Josephus, 
the  Jewish  commonwealth  was  a  theocracy,  a  king- 
dom in  which  God  was  King. 

And  while  this  kingdom  was  at  first  limited  to  the 


140        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

Jewisli  people,  the  idea  of  universal  dominion  soon 
began  to  prevail. 

"Oh  clap  your  hands,  all  ye  peoples; 
Shout  unto  God  with  the  voice  of  triumph. 
For  Jehovah  Most  High  is  terrible; 
He  is  a  great  King  over  all  the  earth. 
He  subdueth  peoples  under  us, 
And  nations  under  our  feet." 

(Ps.  47:1-3.) 

Even  when  the  outward  fortunes  of  the  kingdom  had 
fallen  into  ruins,  the  prophets  pointed  forward  to 
a  time  when  Zion  should  again  be  exalted,  and  when 
kings  should  come  to  the  brightness  of  her  rising 
(Isa.  60 :  1-3).  ^'  For  that  nation  and  that  kingdom 
that  will  not  serve  thee  shall  perish;  yea,  those  na- 
tions shall  be  utterly  wasted  "  (Isa.  60 :  12). 

This  kingdom,  moreover,  was  conceived  as  an  ever- 
lasting kingdom.  This  thought  received  its  fullest 
expression  in  Daniel.  After  describing  the  four 
great  world  kingdoms,  which  are  represented  by  the 
four  great  beasts,  which  the  seer  saw  coming  up  out 
of  the  sea,  and  after  stating  how  each  of  them  was 
destroyed,  he  goes  on  to  tell  how  "  there  came  with 
the  clouds  of  heaven  one  like  unto  a  son  of  man,''  to 
whom  was  given  ''  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  king- 
dom," whom  all  peoples,  nations,  and  languages 
should  serve.  Then  the  prophecy  is  uttered,  ^'  His 
dominion  is  an  everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not 
pass  away,  and  his  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be 
destroyed"  (Dan.  7:13,  14). 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  141 

The  Old  Testament,  therefore,  had  the  conception 
of  a  kingdom,  in  which  God  should  be  King,  which 
should  at  last  embrace  in  its  dominion  all  the  peoples 
of  the  earth,  and  which  should  be  everlasting  in  its 
duration.  But  the  strange  fatality  of  the  Jewish 
people  was  that  they  persistently  misunderstood  and 
perverted  the  teaching  of  their  noblest  prophets.  In- 
stead of  recognizing  that  God  had  chosen  them  and 
blessed  them  in  order  that  they  might  become  his 
servants  to  transmit  his  blessings  to  all  nations,  they 
believed  that  they  had  been  chosen  as  his  favourites ; 
instead  of  realizing  that  the  blessings  which  God  had 
promised  them  should  serve  for  their  own  and  others' 
spiritual  uplift,  they  allowed  themselves  to  become 
steeped  in  earthly  good,  so  that  the  very  favours  of 
Jehovah  only  served  to  hide  him  from  their  eyes; 
and  instead  of  learning  to  subordinate  themselves  and 
all  their  possessions  to  the  accomplishment  of  God's 
will  among  men,  they  sought  to  make  his  gracious 
purposes  subservient  to  their  own  selfish  aggrandize- 
ment. Under  the  guise  of  realizing  God's  kingdom 
among  men,  they  sought  to  realize  a  kingdom  of  their 
own,  in  which  God  as  well  as  the  nations  should  serve 
them. 

2.    The  Name 

As  is  well  known,  Mark  and  Luke  uniformly 
speak  of  '^  the  kingdom  of  God,"  while  Matthew  gen- 
erally uses  the  phrase  "  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  In 
a  few  instances,  Matthew  also  has  the  title  kingdom 


14^        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

of  God,  which  seems  to  indicate  that  he  had  no  preju- 
dice against  it,  and  that  he  practically  used  the  two 
as  synonymous.  Still,  the  question  has  been  raised. 
Why  does  he  use  the  expression  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  where  the  other  two  evangelists  have  the 
kingdom  of  God  ? 

It  should  be  remembered  that  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  Matthew  was  written  by  a  Jewish  Christian 
and  for  Jewish  Christians,  and  that  we  find  many 
of  the  Jewish  preconceptions  and  prejudices  reflected 
in  it.  Now,  we  know  that,  especially  in  later  Juda- 
ism, there  was  a  strong  prejudice  against  pronounc- 
ing the  divine  IsTame.  Other  names  were  found, 
which  were  used  in  its  stead.  This  usage  is  well 
illustrated  in  the  book  of  Daniel,  where,  with  the 
exception  of  chapter  nine,  the  name  Jehovah  is 
uniformly  avoided.  He  is  spoken  of  as  Lord  in 
1:2,  as  the  Holy  One  in  4:13,  as  the  Most  High 
in  7: 18,  and  as  the  Heavens  in  4:26.  And  by  an 
easy  metonomy,  the  last  of  these  titles  came  into  use 
as  a  substitute  for  the  name  which  the  Jews  hesitated 
to  pronounce.  The  author  of  the  First  Gospel  being 
himself  a  Jew,  would  naturally  fall  in  with  this 
usage,  and  the  more  so  as  he  would  respect  the  feel- 
ings of  those  whom  he  was  addressing;  while  Mark 
and  Luke,  who  were  writing  for  Gentile  Christians, 
had  no  such  scruple. 

This,  one  should  have  thought,  might  have  been 
accepted  as  a  sufficient  explanation  of  the  difference 
between   our   several   Gospels    on   this   point.     The 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  143 

question  has,  nevertheless,  been  raised  as  to  the  name 
which  was  used  by  Jesus  himself.  Did  he  say,  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  or  the  kingdom  of  God  ?  Inas- 
much as  Jesus  preached  exclusively  to  Jews,  it  has 
been  assumed  that  he  likewise  said  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  thus  avoiding  offence.  And  if  we  assume 
that  he  did  so  by  way  of  accommodation  and  out  of 
respect  for  the  prejudices  of  his  hearers,  we  may 
grant  the  assumption;  but  we  can  hardly  suppose 
that  he  himself  had  any  prejudices  against  the  use 
of  the  divine  ^N'ame.  In  fact,  we  know  from  the 
testimony  of  Matthew  himself  that  he  used  the  name 
in  other  connections  (Mt.  5:  8,  9). 

3.    The  Meaning 

It  must  be  apparent  to  every  careful  observer  that 
there  is  considerable  fluidity  in  the  manner  in  which 
Jesus  uses  the  term.  It  does  not  always  have  quite 
the  same  meaning;  and  hence  we  find  considerable 
difficulty  in  framing  a  definition.  Probably  the  best 
definition,  which  has  thus  far  been  given,  is  that  of 
Dr.  Hort,  and  given  too  quite  incidentally.  He  calls 
it  "  the  world  of  invisible  laws  by  which  God  is 
ruling  and  blessing  his  creatures."  ^ 

We  will  probably  do  best,  if  we  approach  the  sub- 
ject from  several  different  points  of  view.  We  may 
view  it  as  a  divine  rule  in  the  hearts  of  men,  as  a 

^  Quoted  by  Dr.  Sanday  in  Outlines  of  the  Life  of  Christ, 
p.  79. 


144        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

realm  of  celestial  powers  and  forces,  and  as  a  spirit- 
ual commonwealth. 

1)  A  Divine  Rule, — This  is  the  most  obvious 
sens©  in  which  the  term  is  used  by  Jesus,  and  also 
the  most  fundamental.  It  is  the  sense  which  it  has 
in  the  statement  which  comes  nearest  to  a  definition 
to  be  found  in  the  ]^ew  Testament.  In  the  prayer 
which  Jesus  taught  the  disciples,  the  second  petition 
is,  "  Thy  kingdom  come,''  and  that  is  followed  at 
once  by  a  third,  which  states  the  condition  on  which 
alone  it  is  possible  for  the  kingdom  to  come.  "  Thy 
will  be  done  on  earth,  as  it  is  in  heaven  "  (Mt.  6 :  10). 
The  idea  is  that  the  will  of  God  is  done  perfectly 
in  heaven,  and  that,  when  it  is  done  in  like  manner 
on  earth,  the  kingdom  of  heaven  will  have  come  on 
earth  also. 

A  little  further  on  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
Jesus  is  teaching  the  lesson  of  perfect  trust  in  the 
love  and  care  of  our  heavenly  Father.  He  sets  the 
Christian  spirit  into  contrast  with  the  pagan  spirit. 
The  pagan  seeks  first  food  and  raiment,  and  the 
things  of  this  present  life.  The  Christian  is  ex- 
horted to  seek  first  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  his 
righteousness,  with  the  promise  that  all  these  things 
will  be  added  (Mt.  6:33).  The  correlation,  in 
which  God's  kingdom  and  his  righteousness  are  put, 
indicates  that  righteousness  is  the  chief  characteristic 
of  the  kingdom.  To  seek  God's  righteousness  is  to 
seek  the  kingdom;  and,  by  implication  at  least,  the 
teaching  is  that  whosoever  attains  unto  that  righteous- 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  145 

ness  will  also  have  attained  unto  the  kingdom.  And 
God's  righteousness  can  be  nothing  else  than  the 
complete  realization  of  his  righteous  and  perfect  will. 

On  a  certain  occasion,  Luke  tells  us,  Jesus  was 
asked  by  the  Pharisees,  "when  the  kingdom  of  God 
cometh  " ;  and  he  answered,  ''  The  kingdom  of  God 
cometh  not  with  observation;  neither  shall  they  say, 
Lo,  here !  or,  There !  for  lo,  the  kingdom  of  God  is 
within  you  "  (Lk.  17 :  20,  21).  l^ow,  while  it  is  true 
that  another  rendering  is  suggested  in  the  margin 
for  the  phrase  "  within  you,''  making  it  "  among 
you,"  the  probability  is  that  the  better  translation 
is  found  in  the  text.  Certainly  that  is  a  perfectly 
correct  and  natural  rendering;  and,  if  adopted,  the 
suggestion  is  that  the  kingdom  of  God  is  an  inward 
spiritual  affair,  consisting  of  the  reign  of  God  in  the 
heart, 

2)  A  Celestial  Realm. — But  it  would  be  a  mis- 
take to  suppose  that  the  kingdom  of  God  is  entirely 
a  subjective  affair,  as  if  it  consisted  solely  in  a  dis- 
position of  the  heart.  On  the  contrary,  there  are 
many  passages  which  clearly  assume  the  objective 
existence  of  the  kingdom.  To  recall  the  definition 
of  Dr.  Hort,  "  it  is  the  world  of  invisible  laws  by 
which  God  is  ruling  and  blessing  his  creatures."  It 
is  a  realm  of  invisible  powers  and  forces,  which,  hav- 
ing their  origin  in  heaven,  have  reached  down  into 
this  earth,  and  are  now  moulding  and  shaping  the 
destinies  of  mankind.  All  those  passages,  which 
speak  of  the  kingdom  as  "given"  (Mt.  21:43),  as 


146        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

"received"  (Mk.  10:15),  as  "prepared"  by  God 
(Mt.  25 :  34),  as  "  inherited  "  by  men  (Mt.  25 :  34), 
and  as  something  into  which  men  may  "  enter  "  (Mt. 
5:20),  imply  its  objective  character. 

When  Jesus  said  to  the  Jews,  "  Therefore  say  I 
unto  you,  The  kingdom  of  God  shall  be  taken  away 
from  you,  and  shall  be  given  to  a  nation  bringing 
forth  the  fruit  thereof"  (Mt.  21:43),  he  can  not 
have  meant  simply  that  God's  reign  would  be  taken 
away  from  them;  for  they  had  not  accepted  that 
reign.  They  would  not  let  God  rule  in  their  hearts. 
That  which  would  be  taken  away  from  them  was  cer- 
tain blessings  and  privileges,  which  as  God's  people 
they  had  enjoyed.  They  would  be  left  without  those 
blessings,  and  consequently  also  without  the  help  of 
those  celestial  powers  and  forces  which  had  been  at 
hand  in  their  past  history  to  assist  them  in  the  at- 
tainment of  their  high  ends. 

Something  of  the  same  meaning  attaches  to  the 
first  of  the  beatitudes.  "  Blessed  are  the  poor  in 
spirit;  for  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven"  (Mt. 
5:3).  The  kingdom  is  viewed  as  a  possession,  on 
which  the  poor  in  spirit  have  already  entered,  some- 
thing which  may  be  regarded  as  a  gift  and  blessing 
bestowed.  Similarly  with  the  statement  which  fol- 
lows soon  after  in  the  same  chapter.  "  For  I  say 
unto  you,  that  except  your  righteousness  shall  ex- 
ceed the  righteousness  of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees, 
ye  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven"  (Mt.  5 :  20).    Here  the  righteousness  which 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  147 

is  required  is  the  condition  for  entrance  into  the 
kingdom,  which  is  itself  conceived  as  an  objective 
fact,  with  blessings  to  be  desired.  It  is  a  good 
which  is  to  be  attained  by  conformity  with  certain 
conditions.  And  this  idea  of  the  kingdom  as  a  good 
to  be  attained  is  contained  in  the  parables  of  the 
Pearl  of  Great  Price  and  the  Hid  Treasure.  Both 
represent  the  kingdom  as  a  good  for  the  possession 
of  which  one  may  well  give  up  all  else. 

3)  A  Spiritual  Commonweath. — Consisting  of 
the  divine  rule  in  the  heart,  and  bringing  certain 
privileges  and  blessings  to  those  who  are  under  that 
rule,  the  kingdom  next  comprises  certain  men,  who 
are  under  that  rule  and  in  the  enjoyment  of  those 
blessings.  It  is  the  select  company  of  those  who  have 
responded  to  the  divine  challenge  and  obeyed  God's 
will.  In  other  words,  it  is  a  spiritual  commonwealth, 
composed  of  men  who  have  certain  possessions  in 
common.  We  may  point  to  certain  passages  in  which 
this  is  the  predominant  idea. 

Several  of  the  parables  present  this  conception, 
notably  those  of  the  Tares  and  the  Drag  ]^et.  The 
good  seed  are  the  sons  of  the  kingdom,  while  the  tares 
are  the  sons  of  the  evil  one  (Mt.  13 :  38).  The  tares 
are  now  in  the  kingdom,  that  is,  they  are  in  the 
society  of  the  righteous,  and  so  nearly  like  them  in 
outward  appearance  that  it  is  impossible  to  separate 
them.  They  remain  in  the  kingdom  until  the  end, 
not  in  the  sense  that  they  are  under  the  divine  rule, 
for  that  they  have  not  at  any  time  been;  nor  in  the 


148        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

sense  that  they  are  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  blessings 
of  the  kingdom,  for  in  the  true  sense  of  that  word 
they  have  never  known  what  those  blessings  mean; 
but  they  remain  in  the  kingdom  in  the  sense  of  being 
outwardly  comprehended  in  the  society  of  those  who 
are  under  the  divine  rule  and  in  the  enjoyment  of  the 
blessings.  And  very  much  the  same  thought  is  found 
in  the  parable  of  the  Drag  Net  (Mt.  13:47-50). 
Those  caught  by  the  net  are  che  men  and  women 
who  have  been  gathered  out  of  the  world  into  the 
society  of  the  righteous.  They  are  not  all  good. 
Some  of  them  are  bad;  but  they  have  been  gathered 
together  with  the  good,  and  together  they  form  a 
society  of  men. 

Now  this  society  may  be  spoken  of  as  a  common- 
wealth; for  there  are  certain  things  which  its  mem- 
bers possess  in  common.  Of  course,  these  possessions 
are  not  primarily  material  or  earthly ;  they  are  spirit- 
ual in  character,  and  have  come  down  from  that 
celestial  realm  out  of  which  the  kingdom  itself  is 
descended.  Hence  we  designate  it  a  spiritual  com- 
monwealth. The  bond  which  binds  the  men  together 
into  a  society  is  spiritual;  and  the  privileges  and 
blessings  which  constitute  their  commonwealth  are 
spiritual  likewise.  To  such  an  extent  is  this  true 
that  Paul  could  say,  "  The  kingdom  of  God  is  not 
eating  and  drinking,  but  righteousness  and  peace  and 
joy  in  the  Holy  Spirit ''  (Rom.  14: 17). 

This  conception  of  the  kingdom,  as  a  society  of 
those  who  are  under  the  divine  rule  and  in  the  en- 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  149 

joyment  of  the  divine  blessing,   forms  tlie  natural 
connecting  link  with  the  later  idea  of  the  church. 


4.    The  Nature  of  the  Kingdom 

Can  we  now  define  the  nature  of  this  kingdom 
more  nearly?  If  it  is  an  objective  reality,  to  what 
realm  does  it  belong  ?  If  it  is  a  '^  world  of  invisible 
laws,"  is  it  supernatural  in  character,  or  does  it 
belong  to  the  realm  of  nature?  Can  we  speak  of  it 
in  any  real  sense  as  from  heaven,  as  now  existing  in 
heaven,  or  is  it  simply  of  the  earth,  earthy,  achieved 
and  realized  by  men  ?  Or  if  both,  to  what  extent  is 
it  from  heaven,  and  to  what  extent  is  it  an  achieve- 
ment realized  by  human  effort  ?  Dr.  H.  J.  Holtzman 
has  admirably  characterized  it  first  as  a  gift,  '' eine 
Gahe/'  and  then  as  a  task,  '' eine  Aufgahe/'  We 
believe  that  the  questions,  just  raised,  may  be  best 
answered,  if  we  approach  the  subject  in  this  way. 

1)  A  Gift. — The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  ''  given." 
This  appears  in  a  number  of  ways.  It  has  been 
^'  prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world"  (Mt.  25:34).  In  its  ultimate  form,  it  can 
be  possessed  only  as  an  inheritance.  According  to 
the  parable  of  the  Wicked  Husbandmen,  it  once  be- 
longed to  the  Jews,  but  was  ^'  taken  away "  from 
them,  and  "  given  "  to  a  nation  bringing  forth  the 
fruits  thereof  (Mt.  21 :  43).  Of  course,  there  can  be 
no  doubt  as  to  the  person  by  whom  it  was  prepared. 
According  to  the  whole  tenor  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus, 


150        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

God  alone  can  have  prepared  it.  He  alone  was  in  the 
beginning,  from  the  foundation  of  the  world;  and 
he  alone  can  be  its  author.  So  there  can  be  no  doubt 
as  to  the  place  where  it  was  prepared,  and  from 
which  it  has  come  to  us  men.  The  place  was  where 
Gtod  is;  and  where  God  is  there  heaven  is;  so  that 
it  can  have  come  from  heaven  only.  It  is  from 
above,  and  belongs  in  its  inmost  and  deepest  essence 
to  heaven. 

That  Jesus  conceived  the  kingdom  as  supernatural 
or  heavenly  in  its  very  constitution  or  essence  is 
brought  out  very  forcible  by  the  answer  which,  ac- 
cording to  the  Fourth  Gospel,  he  gave  to  Pilate: 
"  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world :  if  my  kingdom 
were  of  this  world,  then  would  my  servants  fight, 
that  I  should  not  be  delivered  unto  the  Jews:  but 
now  is  my  kingdom  not  from  hence  "  ( Jn.  18 :  36). 
That  is,  his  kingdom  was  at  that  very  moment  in 
heaven.  His  servants  were  there;  and  from  thence, 
and  thence  only,  did  he  look  for  strength  and  sup- 
port. And  this  teaching  is  supported  by  the  Synoptic 
record.  When  at  the  moment  of  his  arrest  Peter 
drew  the  sword  and  struck  off  the  ear  of  the  high 
priest's  servant,  Jesus  said  to  him,  "  Put  up  again 
thy  sword  into  his  place :  for  all  that  take  the  sword 
shall  perish  with  the  sword.  Or  thinkest  thou  that 
I  can  not  now  beseech  my  Eather,  and  he  shall  even 
now  send  me  more  than  twelve  legions  of  angels  ?  '^ 
(Mt.  26 :  52,  53).  He  would  use  no  earthly  weapons 
for  the  establishment  of  his  kingdom;  he  relied  solely 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  151 

on  the  help  which  cometh  from  God  for  the  further- 
ance of  his  cause.  And  the  reason  for  it  is  not  hard 
to  find.  His  kingdom  being  supernatural  in  its 
origin,  and  supernatural  in  its  character,  it  can  be  ad- 
vanced only  by  superterrestrial  and  heavenly  means. 

The  same  thing  must  be  said  of  the  blessings  which 
the  kingdom  brings.  They  are  likewise  celestial  in 
their  origin  and  character.  Jesus  had  not  come  to 
give  earthly  stations  or  worldly  rewards.  This  is 
forcibly  illustrated  by  the  incident  related  of  James 
and  John  on  the  last  journey  to  Jerusalem.  Think- 
ing that  the  kingdom  was  now  about  to  be  set  up  at 
Jerusalem,  they  came  to  Jesus  to  ask  that  they  might 
sit,  the  one  on  his  right  hand,  and  the  other  on  his 
left  in  his  kingdom.  Their  meaning  is,  of  course, 
perfectly  clear.  They  were  still  thinking  of  an 
earthly  kingdom,  and  they  wanted  the  highest  offices 
in  the  gift  of  the  King.  Jesus  sternly  rebuked  their 
unhallowed  ambition.  He  told  them  that  they  knew 
not  what  they  were  asking.  So  far  as  their  request 
could  be  granted  in  the  same  earthly  sense  in  which 
it  was  made,  it  meant  the  sharing  with  him  of  his 
cup  of  suffering;  but  in  reality,  their  request  could 
not  be  granted.  To  sit  on  his  right  hand,  and  on 
his  left  in  his  kingdom,  was  a  gift,  which  had  been 
prepared,  as  the  kingdom  itself  had  been  prepared, 
and  could  be  given  only  to  those  for  whom  it  had 
been  intended  by  God  (Mk.  10 :  35-40). 

Should  we  now  endeavour  to  define  more  closely 
what  these  heavenly  gifts,  this  supreme  good,   is, 


152        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

that  is  brought  unto  us  in  and  through  the  kingdom, 
we  should  say  that  on  its  negative  side  it  consists  in 
the  forgiveness  of  sin.  This  is  already  implied  in  the 
very  message  with  which  Jesus  opened  his  public 
ministry  in  Galilee.  That  was,  according  to  Mark, 
^'  The  time  is  fulfilled,  and  the  kingdom  of  God  is 
at  hand :  repent,  and  believe  in  the  gospel  "  (Mk. 
1: 15).  ISTot  only  was  repentance  the  indispensable 
condition  for  the  coming  of  the  kingdom;  it  is  also 
the  indispensable  condition  for  the  forgiveness  of 
sin;  and  wherever  that  condition  is  at  hand  there 
also  is  found  forgiveness.  For  this  reason  probably 
the  removal  of  transgressions  is  associated  in  the 
Old  Testament  with  the  coming  of  the  kingdom,  with 
the  anointing  of  the  Most  Holy  (Dan.  9 :  24) ;  and 
in  the  New  Testament  forgiveness  is  equivalent 
to  salvation  (Lk.  7 :  47,  50) ,  and  being  saved 
is  equivalent  to  entering  into  the  kingdom 
(Mk.  10:23,  26). 

On  the  positive  side,  the  good  which  the  kingdom 
brings  is  summed  up  in  the  conception  of  eternal 
life.  Indeed,  eternal  life  and  the  kingdom  of  God 
are  used  synonymously  by  Jesus.  The  rich  young 
ruler  came  to  ask  what  good  thing  he  must  do  in 
order  that  he  might  inherit  eternal  life.  After  he 
had  received  that  supreme  challenge  to  his  loyalty  to 
God,  in  which  Jesus  told  him  to  go  and  sell  all 
that  he  had  and  give  to  the  poor,  and  after  he  had 
made  his  great  refusal  and  turned  away  sorrowful, 
Jesus  turned  to  his  disciples  and  exclaimed,  ''  How 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  153 

hardly  shall  they  that  have  riches  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  God  "  (Lk.  18  :  24).  Where  the  young  man 
had  said  eternal  life,  Jesus  now  says  the  kingdom 
of  God,  showing  that  in  his  view  the  two  are  syn- 
onymous. And  it  was  probably  because  of  this  co- 
ordination of  the  two  terms  by  Jesus  that  the  author 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel  has  almost  entirely  displaced 
the  latter  by  the  former.  And  when  we  have  thus 
placed  these  two  side  by  side,  we  realize  how  the 
kingdom  is  a  gift ;  and  when  we  realize  what  eternal 
life  is,  the  life  of  God  in  the  soul  of  man,  we  see,  as 
perhaps  we  can  in  no  other  way,  how  the  kingdom, 
in  its  inmost  essence,  first  of  all  belongs  to  the  celes- 
tial realm. 

2)  A  Task. — But  if  the  kingdom  of  God  is  thus 
a  heavenly  good,  a  divine  gift  to  be  bestowed  on 
men,  it  is  none  the  less  a  task  to  be  achieved.  It 
can  be  received  only  in  accordance  with  certain  con- 
ditions. In  as  far  as  it  is  the  divine  rule  in  the 
hearts  of  men,  it  must  be  freely  accepted.  God's 
will,  which  is  first  of  all  an  objective  fact,  must 
become  man's  will,  and  thus  a  subjective  factor.  The 
law,  which  was  at  first  written  in  ordinances,  must 
be  written  in  the  heart;  and  the  good,  which  comes 
down  from  heaven,  must  be  transmuted  into  char- 
acter. This  holds  both  for  the  individual  and  for 
the  community. 

Hence  it  is  that  the  kingdom  is  represented  as  an 
object  of  endeavour.  When  on  a  certain  occasion 
one  said,  "  Lord,  are  there  few  that  be  saved  ?  "  Jesus 


154        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

replied  by  saying,  ''  Strive  to  enter  in  by  the  narrow 
door.'^  And  be  immediately  added  the  reason  for 
the  exhortation ;  ''  For  many,  I  say  unto  you,  shall 
seek  to  enter  in,  and  shall  not  be  able  "  (Lk.  13 :  23, 
24).  And  the  word  used  in  the  Greek  is  intensive, 
suggesting  the  idea  of  earnest  endeavour.  Not  every 
one  will  succeed  in  entering  the  kingdom ;  only  those 
who  put  forth  the  requisite  effort.  And  with  this 
agrees  what  is  said  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 
"  Seek  ye  first  his  kingdom,  and  his  righteousness ; 
and  all  these  things  shall  be  added  unto  you  "  (Mt. 
6 :  33).  Those  whose  chief  endeavour  is  given  to  the 
things  of  the  world  may  succeed  in  getting  them ;  but 
they  can  never  hope  to  obtain  the  blessings  of  the 
kingdom.  These  can  be  won  by  those,  and  those  only, 
who  make  the  kingdom  the  supreme  end  of  their 
lives. 

The  same  thought  is  presented  under  slightly  dif- 
ferent aspects  in  other  passages.  The  challenge  from 
the  beginning  was,  '^  The  time  is  fulfilled,  and  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand:  repent  ye,  and  believe 
in  the  gospel  "  (Mk.  1 :  15).  Man  could  not  ascend 
into  heaven  to  bring  the  kingdom  down  from  above. 
It  had  to  come  as  a  divine  gift.  But  now  that  it  was 
at  hand,  the  necessity  was  upon  men  to  repent; 
otherwise  it  could  bring  them,  not  the  blessings  which 
it  was  intended  to  impart,  but  condemnation  and 
death  only.  Its  realization,  whether  in  the  form  of 
divine  rule  in  the  heart  or  in  the  form  of  blessing, 
was   conditioned   on  man's  turning  from  sin  unto 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  155 

holiness.  Hence  only  the  righteous  are  represented 
as  finding  admission  into  the  kingdom  (Mt.  13 :  43, 
49;  25:37,  46). 

Should  we  therefore  attempt  to  define  the  nature 
of  the  kingdom,  we  would  say  that  it  is  supernatural 
and  divine  in  its  origin  and  constitution,  but  human 
and  natural  in  its  realization  in  men  and  in  human 
society.  The  individual  must  make  it  his  own  by 
cheerful  and  willing  obedience  to  the  divine  will,  by 
appropriating  the  gifts  and  blessings  which  it  brings, 
and  by  transforming  them  into  his  own  individual 
character.  And  it  can  come  to  its  realization  in  the 
community  and  the  world  only  as  the  men  of  the 
community  are  won  to  a  similar  free  acceptance  of 
God^s  will  in  all  things.  It  is  utterly  idle  to  dream 
of  the  coming  in  of  the  kingdom  by  a  sort  of  divine 
catastrophe,  till  both  these  ends  are  achieved.  And 
they  can  be  achieved  only  by  human  endeavour — of 
course,  not  human  endeavour  apart  from  the  divine 
inspiration  and  help;  but  still  really  and  truly  by 
human  endeavour.  For  however  much  the  individual 
may  rely  on  the  divine  help  in  the  time  of  difficulty, 
temptation,  and  trial,  it  must  be  his  own  work  to 
turn  from  sin  and  to  realize  the  divine  righteousness 
in  his  life.  And  the  same  thing  holds  for  the  com- 
munity. It  is  well  to  pray  God  to  break  down  the 
works  of  darkness;  but  he  uses  human  agencies  for 
the  accomplishment  of  his  will  in  this  respect.  The 
men  who  have  accepted  God's  will  for  their  ovni 
lives  must,  by  patient  effort,  help  to  win  others  to 


156        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

do  likewise ;  and  they  must,  by  continued  well-doing, 
overcome  the  evil  that  is  around  them  in  the  world. 


6.    The  Kmgdom  as  a  Present  Possession 

In  recent  years  there  has  been  considerable  discus- 
sion of  the  question  as  to  whether  Jesus  conceived 
the  kingdom  of  God  as  already  present  or  as  some- 
thing to  be  realized  only  in  the  future.  Since  the 
appearance  of  the  first  edition  of  Johannes  Weiss' 
book,  Die  Predigt  Jesu  vom  Reich  Gottes,  in  1892, 
in  which  the  eschatological  teaching  of  Jesus  was 
especially  emphasized,  a  number  of  scholars  have 
held  that  Jesus  conceived  of  the  kingdom  simply  as 
future.  The  contention  has  been  either  that  Jesus 
did  not  come  to  establish  the  kingdom  at  all,  or  else 
that  he  did  not  do  so  during  the  days  of  his  flesh, 
but  looked  forward  to  its  establishment  in  connection 
with  his  future  return  in  glory.  However,  the  ma- 
jority still  hold  to  the  view  that  there  is  a  real  sense 
in  which  Jesus  proclaimed  the  kingdom  as  a  present 
possession.  Even  Johannes  Weiss,  in  the  second  edi- 
tion of  his  book,  1900,  grants  this  position,  claiming 
that  he  is  not  responsible  for  the  narrowing  of  the 
discussion  to  a  bare  alternative  between  present  and 
future.  He  insists  that  with  Jesus  the  main  thought 
was  the  certainty  of  the  coming  of  the  kingdom, 
and  that  it  was  now  even  at  the  door. 

We  may  make  this  our  starting-point  here.  Jesus 
taught  the  certainty  of  the  coming  of  the  kingdom, 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  157 

and  also  that  it  is  nigh,  even  at  the  door.  About  so 
much  there  can  be  no  doubt  whatever.  His  opening 
proclamation  makes  this  certain.  "  Repent  ye/'  he 
said ;  "  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand  "  (Mt. 
4:17;  Mk.  1:15).  And  not  only  was  this  the 
burden  of  his  own  preaching  at  the  beginning;  but, 
when  he  sent  out  the  Twelve,  he  put  this  same  mes- 
sage into  their  mouth  (Mt.  10:7).  So  when  he 
sent  out  the  Seventy,  that  is  what  he  commissioned 
them  to  preach  (Lk.  10:9,  11).  So  also,  after  he 
had  told  the  disciples  of  the  signs  of  his  coming,  he 
concluded  by  saying,  ^'  Even  so  ye  also,  when  ye  see 
these  things  coming  to  pass,  know  ye  that  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  nigh  "  (Lk.  21 :  31).  Language  like  that 
can  not  be  tortured  into  meaning  that  the  kingdom 
would  come  only  after  centuries  had  elapsed.  It 
can  only  mean  that  Jesus  looked  upon  the  kingdom 
as  certain  to  come,  and  that  in  the  immediate  future. 

But  if  that  were  all,  it  might  still  be  maintained 
that  Jesus  had  not  established  the  kingdom  during 
his  lifetime,  but  expected  to  do  so  in  the  immediate 
future,  when  he  should  have  given  his  life  "  a  ran- 
som for  many,"  and  when  he  should  return  again 
in  glory.  Can  we  point  to  anything  more  definite, 
as  showing  that  he  looked  upon  the  kingdom  as  pres- 
ent, already  within  the  possession  of  his  people  ? 

On  one  occasion,  after  Jesus  had  cast  out  a  demon, 
the  Pharisees  tried  to  explain  the  miracle  by  saying, 
"  This  man  doth  not  cast  out  demons,  but  by  Beelze- 
bub the  prince  of  demons."    Jesus  defended  himself 


158        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

against  the  sinister  attack  first  by  referring  to  the 
well-known  principle  that  a  kingdom  divided  against 
itself  cannot  stand,  and  that  if  he  were  casting  out 
Satan  by  the  help  of  Satan  then  his  kingdom  would 
be  brought  to  desolation  and  have  an  end.  Then  he 
referred  to  what  some  of  them  were  doing,  and  con- 
cluded by  saying,  ''  But  if  I  by  the  Spirit  of  God 
cast  out  demons,  then  is  the  kingdom  of  God  come 
upon  you"  (Mt.  12:28;  Lk.  11:20).  :N'ow,  the 
Greek  word  for  ^^  is  come  "  at  this  place  is  eq)6aaevy 
a  much  stronger  word  than  riyyiuevy  the  word  trans- 
lated "  is  at  hand  "  in  Matthew  4 :  17.  But  even  if 
we  should  forbear  to  insist  on  the  strict  meaning  of 
the  word,  as  Johannes  Weiss  thinks  we  should,  the 
idea  of  the  actual  presence  of  the  kingdom  is  in- 
volved in  the  very  argument  w^hich  Jesus  is  making. 
He  was  casting  out  a  demon,  and  he  insisted  that 
that  was  an  evidence  of  the  presence  of  a  power 
higher  and  greater  than  that  of  Satan ;  and  inasmuch 
as  it  was  an  evidence  of  a  power  opposed  to  Satan, 
it  could  be  none  other  than  the  power  of  God.  But 
if  it  was  that,  then  the  kingdom  of  God  must  have 
been  actually  present,  destroying  the  kingdom  of 
Satan. 

Very  much  the  same  thought  is  implied  in  Luke 
10  :  9,  though  there  the  verb  riyyinev  is  used.  The 
disciples  were  to  heal  the  sick,  and  say,  "  The  king- 
dom of  God  is  come  nigh  unto  you."  Their  power 
to  heal  the  sick  was  an  evidence  that  they  were  pos- 
sessed of  something  which  men  ordinarily  did  not 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  159 

possess.  It  was  a  sign  to  the  disciples,  and  to  those 
to  whom  they  were  sent,  that  the  kingdom  was  actu- 
ally come,  not  simply  a  promise  that  it  was  to  come 
at  some  future  time. 

Another  saying  in  which  the  same  aspect  of  truth 
is  presented  is  the  reply  of  Jesus  to  John,  when  the 
latter  sent  two  of  his  disciples  to  ask,  "  Art  thou  he 
that  cometh,  or  look  we  for  another  ? ''  (Lk.  7 :  19 ; 
Mt.  11:  3).  Jesus  did  not  give  a  direct  answer,  but 
pointed  John's  disciples  to  the  works  which  they 
saw  done  before  their  very  eyes;  and  then  he  told 
them  to  report  these  things  to  their  master.  The 
reply,  however,  amounted  to  an  affirmation  that  he 
was  the  coming  One,  the  Messiah.  The  works  fore- 
told of  the  Messiah  (Isa.  35:  5,  6;  61: 1)  were  the 
very  works  he  was  doing.  They  were  the  evidence 
that  in  him  the  prophecies  had  been  fulfilled,  that  the 
expected  salvation  was  at  hand,  and  hence  that  the 
kingdom  had  already  come  in  a  very  real  sense. 

If  now  we  recall  our  definition  of  the  kingdom,  we 
can  not  be  at  a  loss  to  know  in  what  sense  the  king- 
dom is  thus  a  present  possession.  The  primary  and 
fundamental  conception  of  the  kingdom  is  the  reign 
of  God  in  the  hearts  of  men.  In  the  heart  of  Jesus 
that  reign  had  already  begun,  and  was  indeed  per- 
fect. In  the  hearts  of  the  disciples  it  was  beginning ; 
in  a  feeble  way  indeed,  but  really  beginning; 
and  even  if  not  perfect,  it  was,  in  as  far  as  it  had 
begun,  the  real  presence  of  the  kingdom.  And  so 
we  can  say,  in  as  far  as  through  the  gospel  of  Jesus, 


160         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

the  churcli  is  now  overcoming  the  powers  of  evil, 
it  carries  within  itself  the  assurance  that  the  king- 
dom is  at  hand.  The  kingdom  is  in  one  sense 
synonymous  with  salvation;  and  every  one  who 
through  the  grace  of  Jesus  Christ  is  finding  his  de- 
liverance from  the  power  of  sin  has  entered  the  king- 
dom, and  is  a  living  witness  of  its  presence. 

6.    The  Kingdom  as  a  Blessed  Hope 

It  would  be  a  mistake,  however,  to  suppose  that 
Jesus  primarily  emphasized  this  aspect  of  the  truth, 
or  that  he  laid  the  emphasis  on  the  kingdom  as 
already  come.  Rather  the  emphasis  is  on  the  other 
side.  In  its  full  glory,  its  perfect  realization,  it  is 
even  now  a  thing  of  the  future,  a  blessed  hope  rather 
than  a  present  possession.  In  as  far  as  it  has  already 
been  realized  either  in  the  hearts  of  individual  Chris- 
tians or  in  the  life  of  the  church,  it  is  an  earnest  of 
what  is  to  come,  rather  than  the  full  gift  of  God. 

This  appears  first  of  all,  and  perhaps  most  clearly, 
in  the  prayer  which  he  has  taught  us.  The  second 
petition  is,  "  Thy  kingdom  come ; ''  and  that  is  a 
petition  which  not  only  fitted  the  position  of  the  first 
disciples,  but  that  of  all  Christians  even  to  the  end 
of  time.  We  can  not  conceive  of  a  time  in  this 
present  world  order,  when  the  petition  will  become 
obsolete.  There  is  not  a  prayer  which  we  have  reason 
to  offer  with  greater  fervency.  But  that  only  means 
that  Jesus  first  of  all  conceived  of  the  kingdom  as 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  161 

something  still  to  come,  as  a  good  to  be  earnestly 
sought  and  desired;  and  it  means  further  that  the 
church,  in  her  own  experience,  has  verified  this  con- 
ception as  true. 

'Now,  it  is  scarcely  necessary  to  collect  the  various 
sayings  of  Jesus  which  emphasize  this  aspect  of  his 
teaching.  Whenever  he  speaks  of  our  entering  into 
the  kingdom,  of  the  kingdom  as  coming,  this  is  the 
conception  which  underlies  his  statements.  A  few 
examples  may  suffice  as  illustrations  of  the  entire 
class.  ''  For  I  say  unto  you,  that  except  your 
righteousness  shall  exceed  the  righteousness  of  the 
scribes  and  Pharisees,  ye  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  heaven"  (Mt.  5:20).  That  was 
spoken  to  the  disciples,  and  at  a  time  when  they 
had  already  made  their  first  response  to  his  call,  and 
when  in  a  most  real  sense  the  reign  of  God  had 
begun  in  their  hearts;  and  yet,  although  already  in 
possession  of  that  eternal  life  which  is  the  inmost 
and  deepest  of  the  gifts  which  the  kingdom  brings, 
they  were  still  very  far  from  a  complete  realization 
of  its  full  significance.  Again  he  said,  "  Verily  I  say 
unto  you.  There  be  some  of  them  that  stand  by,  who 
shall  in  no  wise  taste  of  death,  till  they  see  the  king- 
dom of  God  come  with  power ''  (Mk.  9:1;  Mt. 
16:28;  Lk.  9:27).  The  time  was  immediately 
after  Jesus  had  for  the  first  time  told  the  disciples 
in  unmistakable  language  of  the  necessity  of  his  suf- 
ferings and  death,  and  just  after  the  great  confes- 
sion.    The  disciples  had  risen  to  the  point  where 


162        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

they  had  learned  to  recognize  Jesus,  in  the  real 
splendour  of  his  person,  as  the  Messiah;  and  hence 
they  had  come  to  stand  to  him  in  that  inner  mystical 
relation  which  made  them  participants  of  his  undying 
life.  And  yet  even  then  there  was  a  sense  in  which 
the  kingdom  was  clearly  still  in  the  future  for  them. 
Once  more,  when  Jesus  stood  before  the  assembled 
elders  of  the  people,  and  when  the  high  priest  asked 
him,  "  Art  thou  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  Blessed  ?  " 
he  replied,  ^'  I  am :  and  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man 
Bitting  at  the  right  hand  of  power,  and  coming  with 
the  clouds  of  heaven  "  (Mk.  14:  61,  62 ;  Mt.  26 :  63, 
64).  'Now  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  is  else- 
where associated  with  the  coming  of  the  kingdom 
(Mt.  25 :  31-34)  ;  so  that  the  kingdom  is  really  again 
projected  into  the  future.  According  to  Matthew 
this  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  on  the  clouds  of 
heaven  is  indeed  spoken  of  as  taking  place  '^  hence- 
forth "  (Mt.  26:  63),  that  is  from  that  day  onward; 
yet  even  under  that  view  it  belonged  to  the  future. 

A  number  of  other  passages  might  be  brought  for- 
ward to  show  that  this  is  the  prevailing  view.  Jesus 
emphasized  the  fact  that  the  kingdom  is  still  to 
come. 

But  how  shall  we  reconcile  the  apparent  contradic- 
tion ?  How  can  the  kingdom  be  a  present  possession, 
and  yet  continue  to  hover  over  us  as  a  gift  of  God 
for  which  we  must  continue  to  pray  and  strive  ?  It 
is  present  as  a  principle,  as  a  power  in  the  hearts 
and  lives  of  God's  people,  but  as  yet  imperfectly 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  163 

realized.  It  exists  now  alongside  of,  and  in  antag- 
onism with  the  kingdom  of  evil,  with  which  it  is 
continually  in  conflict.  Even  the  hearts  of  the  best 
of  men  are  not  wholly  free  from  the  power  of  sin 
and  evil;  and  hence  the  kingdom  can  not  yet  have 
come  with  its  full  glory  and  power  into  any  life. 
The  same  is  true  of  every  community.  Evil  still 
exists  everywhere;  and  until  Satan  and  his  kingdom 
are  overthrown,  the  kingdom  of  God  can  not  be  mani- 
fested with  its  full  plenitude  of  grace  and  power. 


VII 
THE  FOUI^DEK  OF  THE  KINGDOM 

THE  idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God  implies  the 
thought  of  the  King.  The  two  are  correla- 
tive ;  and  the  hope  of  the  coming  kingdom  is, 
in  the  Old  Testament,  very  closely  connected  with 
the  coming  of  the  King.  Indeed,  the  coming  of  the 
kingdom  is  everywhere  made  dependent  on  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  King. 

E'ow,  primarily  the  King  was  none  other  than 
Jehovah  himself ;  and  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  was 
conceived  as  connected  with  the  personal  coming  of 
the  Lord.  This  is  the  burden  of  the  great  Book  of 
Consolation,  which  occupies  the  centre  of  our  present 
book  of  Isaiah.  The  comfort  which  the  great  Un- 
known gives  to  Israel  is  made  to  rest  on  the  assur- 
ance that  the  glory  of  Jehovah  was  about  to  be  re- 
vealed. Hence  the  cry,  "  The  voice  of  one  that  crieth, 
Prepare  ye  in  the  wilderness  the  way  of  Jehovah: 
make  level  in  the  desert  a  highway  for  our  God. 
Every  valley  shall  be  exalted,  and  every  mountain 
and  hill  shall  be  made  low ;  and  the  uneven  shall  be 
made  level,  and  the  rough  places  a  plain:  and  the 
glory  of  Jehovah  shall  be  revealed,  and  all  flesh  shall 

164 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM         165 

see  it  together ;  for  the  mouth  of  Jehovah  hath  spoken 
it ''  (Isa.  40 :  3-5).  It  is  true,  this  passage  is  quoted 
hj  all  three  of  our  Synoptists  as  referring  to  the 
Messiah;  and  it  undoubtedly  has  Messianic  signifi- 
cance. But  it  was  first  of  all  spoken  of  Jehovah 
himself ;  and  it  represents  him  primarily  as  the  King, 
whose  coming  would  bring  salvation. 

In  later  times,  however,  the  coming  King  came 
to  be  identified  with  the  Son  of  David.  The  Mes- 
siah was  anointed  of  God  to  speak  peace  to  the  na- 
tions, and  he  was  destined  to  establish  the  kingdom 
whose  dominion  should  be  from  sea  to  sea,  and  from 
the  River  to  the  ends  of  the  earth.  The  classic  pas- 
sage on  this  point  is  Zechariah  9 :  9,  10,  itself  quoted 
in  the  New  Testament  in  connection  with  our  Lord's 
triumphal  entry  into  Jerusalem.  "  Rejoice  greatly, 
O  daughter  of  Zion;  shout,  O  daughter  of  Jeru- 
salem: he  is  just,  and  bringing  salvation;  lowly, 
and  riding  upon  an  ass.  And  I  will  cut 
off  the  chariot  from  Ephraim,  and  the  horse  from 
Jerusalem;  and  the  battle  bow  shall  be  cut  off; 
and  he  shall  speak  peace  unto  the  nations:  and  his 
dominion  shall  be  from  sea  to  sea,  and  from  the 
River  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth."  As  Kautzsch  says, 
the  expectation  of  a  king  of  David's  family  is  found 
without  doubt  in  this  beautiful  passage,  though  the 
expected  One  is  simply  called  a  king.  "  The  idea 
of  the  world  empire  of  the  Messiah  appears  here 
with  its  final  stamp,  and  indeed  in  a  form  which  goes 
far  beyond  all  prophecies  uttered  hitherto,   and  to 


166        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

which  there  is  no  parallel  except  in  passages  like 
Psalm  2 :  8/' ' 

!N^ow,  just  as  a  number  of  passages,  of  which  the 
one  above  quoted  from  Isaiah  40 :  3-5  is  an  example, 
connect  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  with  the  personal 
coming  of  Jehovah;  so  do  another  set  of  passages, 
of  which  this  latter  from  Zechariah  is  a  classic  illus- 
tration, represent  the  appearance  of  the  Messiah  as 
the  signal  for  the  ushering  in  of  the  long-expected 
kingdom.  On  the  one  side  the  kingdom  is  repre- 
sented as  coming  from  above  by  the  direct  interven- 
tion of  the  strong  right  hand  of  Jehovah  himself;  on 
the  other  the  king  who  brings  it  to  pass  is  none  other 
than  the  mighty  son  of  David. 

What  was  the  attitude  of  Jesus  with  reference  to 
this  twofold  expectation?  Did  he  conceive  of  the 
kingdom  as  founded  directly  and  immediately  by 
Jehovah  ?  And  did  he  think  of  God  as  the  King  of 
this  kingdom  ?  Or  did  he  represent  the  kingdom  as 
founded  by  human  agency,  albeit  through  the  super- 
human might  of  Jehovah  himself  ?  The  significance 
of  these  questions  appears  the  moment  we  take  up  the 
problem  of  the  relation  of  Jesus  himself  to  the 
kingdom. 

And  one  thing  with  reference  to  his  message  should 
be  noted  at  this  point.  According  to  the  Synoptic 
Gospels,  the  emphasis  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus  was  on 
the  idea  of  the  kingdom.  That  he  proclaimed  as  at 
hand.  Did  he  also  proclaim  the  presence  of  the 
*  Hastings'  Bible  Dictionary,  Extra  Vol.,  p.  713  f. 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM         167 

Messianic  King?  Our  answer  depends  on  the  an- 
swer which  we  give  to  still  another  question.  Did 
he  conceive  himself  to  be  the  Messiah?  And  did 
he  go  on  the  assumption  that  he  was  commissioned 
to  be  the  founder  of  the  kingdom?  The  question 
is  one  which  has  been  much  debated  in  recent  years. 
To  answer  it  we  must  turn  to  the  self-consciousness 
of  Jesus.    What  did  he  think  and  say  of  himself  ? 

As  we  said  before  with  reference  to  the  proper 
starting-point  in  our  study  of  the  kingdom  of  God, 
so  we  must  say  here.  It  is  important  that  we  should 
observe  the  place  on  which  the  emphasis  lies.  As  it 
was  necessary  for  us  to  inquire  into  Jesus'  concep- 
tion of  God,  before  we  were  prepared  to  study  his 
idea  of  the  kingdom ;  so  we  must  inquire  into  what 
he  thought  of  his  relation  to  God,  before  we  can  fully 
estimate  what  he  said  of  his  relation  to  the  kingdom. 

1.   Ris  Filial  Consciousness 

The  first  thing  that  impresses  the  careful  student, 
who  inquires  into  the  self -consciousness  of  Jesus,  is 
the  fact  that  he  always  spoke  and  acted  as  if  he 
knew  himself  to  be  the  Son  of  God.  In  all  his  re- 
lations to  God  he  bore  himself  as  one  who  was  dom- 
inated in  every  word  and  deed  by  a  filial  conscious- 
ness. This  is  seen  in  the  way  in  which  he  constantly 
spoke  of  God  as  Father. 

Our  first  glimpse  into  this  filial  consciousness  we 
get  through  the  very  first  words  which  have  been 


168        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

preserved  to  us  from  his  lips.  When  he  was  twelve 
years  old,  he  visited  the  temple  with  Joseph  and 
Mary,  and  became  a  son  of  the  law.  When  his 
mother  then  reproachfully  said  to  him,  ''  Son,  why 
hast  thou  thus  dealt  with  us  ?  behold  thy  father  and 
I  have  sought  thee  sorrowing,''  he  replied,  ^'  How 
is  it  that  ye  sought  me  ?  knew  ye  not  that  I  must  be 
in  my  Father's  house?"  (Lk.  2:48,  49).  We,  of 
course,  do  not  know  what  lay  behind  that  expression 
in  the  previous  life  of  the  boy  Jesus ;  but  it  is  a  sig- 
nificant fact  that,  at  this  the  first  glimpse  which  we 
get  into  his  inner  life,  we  find  him  possessed  with  this 
consciousness  of  sonship.  And  there  can  be  no  doubt 
about  the  genuineness  of  this  portion  of  Luke's  Gos- 
pel. We  do  not  know  from  what  source  the  narrative 
is  derived;  but  it  bears  unmistakable  evidence  of 
being  genuine.  As  Arno  ISTeumann  has  pointed  out, 
it  has  all  the  marks  of  Schmiedel's  famous  founda- 
tion pillars;  and  it  is  well  to  remember  that  Neu- 
mann was  a  pupil  of  Schmiedel's.  ''  Such  state- 
ments could  not  have  been  invented  by  worshippers 
of  Jesus,  nurtured  in  a  later  dogma  regarding  his 
person."  ^  It  must  hence  rest  on  a  genuine  tradi- 
tion. It  is  true,  ISTeumann  thinks  that  the  saying, 
^'  Know  ye  not  that  I  must  be  in  my  Father's  house," 
is  a  later  addition ;  but  he  advances  no  argument  for 
his  opinion  beyond  his  general  assumption  that  all 
statements  which  imply  a  superhuman  origin  and 
character  of  Jesus  can  not  be  genuine.  But  as  we 
*  Jesus,  p.  47. 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM        169 

decline  to  follow  him  in  that  assumption,  so  we  de- 
cline to  follow  him  in  the  inference  which  he  has 
drawn  from  it.  We  believe  that  the  question  came 
from  the  lips  of  Jesus,  just  as  we  believe  the  entire 
story  to  be  genuine  history.  The  question  is  so 
much  a  part  of  the  entire  story  that  to  eliminate  it 
would  be  to  destroy  the  point  in  the  narrative.  We 
believe  that  it  gives  us  a  true  account  of  the  God- 
consciousness  of  Jesus  at  the  time;  and  we  regard 
it  exceedingly  suggestive  that  at  the  first  glimpse 
which  we  get  of  his  inner  consciousness,  he  is  thus 
in  the  full  possession  of  this  certainty  of  standing 
in  a  filial  relation  to  God. 

This  filial  consciousnness  of  Jesus  is  brought  to 
our  attention  in  several  different  forms  in  his  public 
teaching.  It  may  be  well  for  us  to  examine  these 
somewhat  carefully,  before  we  enter  on  a  study  of 
its  significance. 

1 )  It  is  brought  to  our  attention,  in  the  first  place, 
in  the  way  in  which  he  refers  to  God  as  Father  and 
to  himself  as  Son.  It  is  true,  in  the  Synoptic  Gos- 
pels, Jesus  is  not  represented  as  using  the  title  "  Son 
of  God,''  as  he  is  made  to  do  in  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
Yet  there  are  expressions  which  clearly  imply  it.  It 
is  implied  in  the  parables  of  the  Wicked  Husband- 
men (Mt.  21:33-41),  and  of  the  Marriage  of  the 
King's  Son  (Mt.  22:1-14).  It  is  implied  likewise 
in  that  classic  statement,  which  has  been  preserved, 
in  almost  identical  words,  by  both  Matthew  and 
Luke,  and  which  undoubtedly  comes  to  us  from  our 


170        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

oldest  source.  "  All  things  have  been  delivered  unto 
me  of  my  Father :  and  no  one  knoweth  the  Son,  save 
the  Father;  neither  doth  any  know  the  Father,  save 
the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  willeth  to 
reveal  him  ''  (Mt.  11 :  27 ;  Lk.  10 :  22).  And  there 
is  another  saying  in  Mark,  derived  from  our  next 
oldest  source,  which  has  the  same  implication.  ''  But 
of  that  day  or  that  hour  knoweth  no  one,  not  even 
the  angels  in  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the  Father 
only  "  (Mk.  13  :  32).  And  it  is  to  be  observed  that 
Schmiedel  puts  the  passage  among  his  foundation 
pillars  for  a  scientific  study  of  the  life  of  Jesus. 
Judged  by  all  the  canons  of  a  sane  and  sound  criti- 
cism, there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  genuineness  of 
either  of  these  passages.  As  near  as  criticism  can 
establish  any  fact,  it  has  established  that  both  these 
sayings,  in  substantially  the  form  in  which  we  now 
have  them,  came  from  the  lips  of  Jesus;  and  they 
establish  beyond  the  peradventure  of  a  doubt  that 
Jesus  spoke  of  God  as  Father  and  of  himself  as  Son. 
And  the  very  collocation  into  which  the  two  terms 
are  put  implies  that  there  was  something  extraordi- 
nary in  the  relation  between  Jesus  and  God,  as  he 
conceived  it.  There  was  only  one  who  can  be  con- 
ceived of  as  meant  by  Father;  and  so  there  can  be 
only  one  to  whom  the  title  Son,  in  the  sense  in  which 
it  is  here  used,  can  be  applied. 

2)  The  same  fact  is  brought  to  our  attention  in 
the  manner  in  which  Jesus  constantly  addressed  God 
in  his  prayers.    As  we  have  before  noted,  there  was 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM         171 

only  one  occasion  when  Jesus  addressed  God  simply 
as  God.  That  was  in  the  agonized  prayer  on  the 
cross,  "  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken 
me  ? ''  and,  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  is  a  quotation 
from  Psalm  22.  On  all  other  occasions  he  is  repre- 
sented as  addressing  God  as  Father.  And  when  he 
taught  the  disciples  how  to  pray,  he  likewise  put  this 
name  into  their  lips.  "  After  this  manner  there- 
fore pray  ye :  Our  Father  who  art  in  heaven  "  (Mt. 
6:9).  'NoWy  all  this  is  supremely  significant,  as  re- 
vealing the  God-consciousness  of  Jesus;  for  if  ever 
there  is  a  time,  when  a  man's  conception  of  God  and 
of  his  relation  to  God  finds  expression,  it  is  when 
he  is  in  his  closet  alone  with  God. 

3)  Again,  Jesus  is  represented  as  saying  "  my 
Father,"  implying  not  simply  that  he  had  the  filial 
consciousness,  but  that  he  was  conscious  also  of 
standing  in  a  peculiar  relation  to  God  such  as  no 
other  man  can  claim.  And  that  claim  is  made  in 
other  ways.  While  Jesus  taught  the  disciples  to  say 
"  Our  Father,"  there  is  no  record  of  his  ever  having 
used  that  formula  in  any  of  his  own  prayers ;  neither 
is  there  any  record  of  his  ever  having  spoken  of  God 
as  his  Father  and  our  Father  in  such  a  way  as  to 
include  both  him  and  the  rest  of  God's  children 
under  the  same  category. 

It  is  true  that  when  we  follow  the  expression, 
"  my  Father,"  through  the  Gospels  to  the  sources 
which  lie  back  of  them,  we  are  confronted  by  a  some- 
what surprising  fact.     The  expression  is  not  found 


172        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

in  Mark;  and  as  that  is  one  of  the  main  sources 
back  of  Matthew  and  Luke,  the  question  naturally 
arises  whether  we  must  give  up  the  Markan  source 
as  authority  for  this  peculiar  claim  on  the  part  of 
Jesus.  There  is  one  expression,  at  least,  which  may 
be  quoted  in  favour  of  it.  It  is  found  in  Mark 
8:38,  "  For  whosoever  shall  be  ashamed  of  me  and 
my  words  in  this  adulterous  and  sinful  generation, 
the  Son  of  man  also  shall  be  ashamed  of  him,  when 
he  cometh  in  the  glory  of  his  Father  with  the  holy 
angels."  Here,  if  the  Son  of  man  refers  to  Jesus, 
as  we  believe  it  does,  then  the  pronoun  '^  his ''  must 
be  equivalent  to  "  my  "  in  the  expression  "  my  Fa- 
ther "  elsewhere.  Luke  has  the  expression  four 
times  (2:49;  10:22;  22:29;  24:49).  One  of 
these  passages  comes  from  the  Q  source,  namely 
10 :  22.  Here  Matthew  also  has  the  pronoun  ^'  my  " ; 
but  in  his  reconstruction  of  Q,  Harnack  expresses  the 
opinion  that,  in  the  most  ancient  authorities,  it  was 
lacking.  Matthew  has  the  expression  at  least  sixteen 
times;  and  in  one  other  place  it  seems  to  come  from 
the  Q  source  (10:32,  33);  but  the  curious  thing 
about  it  is  that  in  the  parallel  passage  in  Luke 
(12:8),  a  different  expression  is  substituted,  and 
here  Harnack  gives  the  preference  to  the  form  in 
Luke.  The  question  therefore  arises  whether  we  can 
quote  the  Q  source  as  favourable  to  the  expression, 
and  whether  perhaps  we  do  not  owe  it  to  an  interpre- 
tation on  the  part  of  the  evangelists.  The  careful 
student  will  doubtless  recognize  that  Matthew  has  a 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM         17S 

peculiar  predilection  for  it;  but  he  will  also  note 
that  it  is  in  harmony  with  other  expressions  which 
undoubtedly  come  to  us  from  the  lips  of  Jesus.  Even 
if  we  were  to  admit  that  the  expression  is  an  inter- 
pretative addition  of  the  evangelist,  it  is  in  harmony 
with  the  claim  contained  in  the  peculiar  collocation 
of  ''  the  Father— the  Son  "  in  both  Matthew  11 :  27 
and  Mark  13  :  32.  ^ 

What  now  is  implied  in  this  filial  consciousness? 
What  did  Jesus  claim  for  himself,  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  he  felt  himself  thus  related  to  God  ? 

^  Dalman,  after  discussing  the  Aramaic  forms  which  lie 
back  of  our  Gospels,  and  which  represent  the  expression 
"  my  Father,"  goes  on  to  say,  "  Jesus  never,  as  it  seems, 
addressed  God  in  prayer  as  'My  Father  in  heaven/  but 
only  as  *  My  Father.'  It  makes  no  difference  whether  the 
Greek  has  merely  TrdTTjp,  as  in  Mt.  11:25  (Lk.  10:21), 
Lk.  22:42;  23:24,  46;  or  oTrdrr/p,  as  in  Mt.  11:26  (Lk.  10:21), 
Mk.  14:36;  or  Trdrr/p  fiov,  as  in  Mt.  26:39,  42.  For  in  each 
case  the  word  to  be  presupposed  on  the  testimony  of  Mk. 
14:36  (cf.  Rom.  8:15;  Gal.  4:6)  is  dSSa.  This  is  just  the 
definite  form,  and  therefore  means  strictly,  '  The  Father ' ; 
but  during  the  obsolescence  of  the  form  with  the  pronominal 
suffix  it  became  the  regular  form  for  '  my  Father.' " — The 
Words  of  Jesus,  pp.  191,  192. 

Archdeacon  Allen  also,  in  discussing  the  same  subject,  and 
especially  the  claim  of  some  Hebraists  that  Jesus  could  not 
have  used  the  expression  "  my  Father "  in  Aramaic,  says, 
"  But  what  is  there  here  to  conflict  with  the  evidence  of  the 
Gospels  that  Christ  spoke  of  God  as  'My  Father'  ?  Surely 
the  language  is  not  so  inadequate  to  express  personal  rela- 
tions that  if  he  wished  to  break  away  from  the  common 
usage  and  to  say  '  my  Father '  instead  of  '  the  Father,'  he 
could  not  have  found  words  to  do  so." — Oxford  Studies  in 
the  Synoptic  Problem,  p.  311. 


174^        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

1)  Jesus  claimed  unique  knowledge  of  God. 
"  Neither  doth  any  know  the  Father,  save  the  Son, 
and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  willeth  to  reveal  him  " 
(Mt.  11 :  27).  That  can  mean  nothing  less  than  that 
Jesus  claimed  to  stand  in  such  relation  to  Grod  that 
he  had  full  insight  into  his  being  and  counsel,  and 
that  he,  moreover,  stood  in  such  relation  to  men  as 
to  be  able  to  give  to  them  a  full  revelation  of  God. 
The  statement  is  introduced  by,  "  All  things  have 
been  delivered  unto  me  of  my  Father,"  which,  in  the 
connection  in  which  it  stands,  can  not  refer  to  the 
fulness  of  divine  power,  as  in  Matthew  28 :  18,  but 
must  refer  to  the  revelation  which  the  Father  was 
pleased  to  make  unto  babes.  As  possessing  the  filial 
spirit  in  a  unique  sense  and  in  an  absolute  degree, 
Jesus  had  insight  into  the  depths  of  the  divine  being, 
so  that  nothing  was  hidden  from  him,  and  so  that 
he  was  enabled  to  make  to  men  the  full  and  complete 
revelation  of  what  God  is  and  wills.  This  claim  in 
itself  implies  the  consciousness  of  standing  in  a 
unique  relation  to  God,  of  a  sonship  of  a  kind  so 
high  and  unique  that,  in  this  sense,  he  can  have  no 
brethren.  It  implies  that,  on  the  plane  of  revelation 
at  least,  he  stands  as  the  only  Mediator  between  God 
and  man,  who  can  alone  give  us  the  knowledge  of 
God  which  we  need  to  be  saved. 

2)  But  this  filial  consciousness  doubtless  implies 
also  much  more.  It  must  mean  more ;  for  if  Jesus 
thus  stood  in  such  a  unique  relation  to  God  so  far  as 
his  knowledge  is  concerned,  he  must  have  stood  in 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM    175 

the  same  unique  relation  with  reference  to  his  will. 
The  will  is  deeper  than  the  intellect;  and,  in  the 
last  analysis,  the  intellect  can  perceive  the  truth  only 
where  the  truth  has  first  of  all  been  apprehended 
and  embraced  by  the  will.  As  the  Son,  Jesus  stood 
in  a  relation  of  perfect  obedience  and  absolute  love 
to  the  Father.  This  is  already  implied  in  the  voice 
which  greeted  him  at  his  baptism,  "  Thou  art  my 
beloved  Son,  in  thee  I  am  well  pleased  "  (Mk.  1:11). 
How  well  pleased?  The  reference  is  to  the  past. 
The  verb  is  evdoKrfaa,  an  aorist,  and  may  be  trans- 
lated, as  Gould  does,  "  in  thee  I  came  to  take  pleas- 
ure." ^  Such  had  been  his  past  life,  such  his  ethical 
harmony  with  God,  that  he  was  owned  as  God's  be- 
loved Son.  And  the  same  thought  of  an  ethical  one- 
ness with  the  Father  is  involved  in  the  story  of  the 
temptation,  which  follows  immediately.  According 
to  Matthew,  his  reply  to  the  first  temptation  was, 
"  Man  shall  not  live  by  bread  alone,  but  by  every 
word  that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  God  ''  (Mt. 
4:4).  The  expression  must  have  been  reported  by 
Jesus  himself,  and  was  doubtless  transmitted  through 
the  Q  source.  It  is  true,  Luke  does  not  have  the 
second  clause;  and,  in  his  reconstruction  of  Q,  Har- 
nack  omits  it  from  what  he  regards'"  the  original 
form  of  the  logion;  yet  it  is  to  be  observed  that  it 
forms  a  part  of  the  original  statement  in  Deuteron- 
omy 8 :  3,  and  correctly  carries  out  the  thought  im- 
plied in  the  first.  And  the  entire  expression  means 
^  Com.  in  loc,  p.  12. 


176        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

that  Jesus  recognized  the  whole  will  of  God  as  the 
law  of  his  life,  and  that  he  was  conscious  of  render- 
ing a  complete  obedience  to  every  precept  which  had 
come  from  him.  As  on  the  intellectual  side  of  his 
being,  Jesus  stood  in  such  a  unique  relation  to  God 
that  he  had  complete  insight  into  his  being  and  will ; 
so  on  the  moral  side,  he  realized  such  absolute  har- 
mony with  God's  will,  that  he  stands  out  among  men 
in  a  similar  preeminence. 

3)  In  Paul  Jesus'  divine  sonship  is  represented 
as  unique  also  in  this  respect  that  he  is  conceived 
as  the  eternal  Son,  as  having  existed  from  the  begin- 
ning, before  all  things,  and  as  having  come  into  this 
world  from  heaven  (Col.  1:15-17;  Phil.  2:6-8). 
The  same  conception  is  found  in  the  Fourth  Gospel 
(Jn.  1 : 1-18).  Is  it  also  found  in  the  Synoptic  teach- 
ing of  Jesus? 

Archdeacon  Allen  finds  it  in  the  passage  which  we 
discussed  a  little  while  ago :  ^'  All  things  were  deliv- 
ered unto  me  by  my  Father"  (Mt.  11:27).  He 
says,  "For  the  aorist  TtapeSoOrf  cf.  ivdoHrjaa  3: 17; 
idcOrf  28 :  18.  The  idea  involved  is  that  of  a  pre- 
temporal  act,  and  carries  with  it  the  conception  of 
the  preexistence  of  the  Messiah.  The  same  thought 
probably  underlies  the  ijlOov  of  5:17;  10 :  34,  and 
the  anoGrsiXavra  of  10 :  40."  ^  It  may  be  ques- 
tioned, however,  whether  this  is  not  hanging  a  very 
heavy  weight  on  a  very  slender  thread.  To  say  that 
the  use  of  a  tense  may  be  made  the  basis  for  such 
*Cow.  in,  loc,  p.  122. 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM        177 

a  doctrine  as  that  of  the  preexistence  of  Jesus  is 
carrying  a  grammatical  argument  to  undue  length. 
Yet  does  not  the  passage  in  question  furnish  a  per- 
fectly natural  and  legitimate  basis  for  such  an  inter- 
pretation of  the  sonship  of  Jesus  as  that  found  in 
Paul  and  John?  Father  and  Son  are  used  in  the 
absolute  sense;  and  when  Jesus  uses  the  terms  in 
that  sense,  as  he  does  also  in  Mark  13 :  32,  he  cer- 
tainly places  himself  into  a  relation  which  far 
transcends  the  limitations  of  all  merely  human  ex- 
perience— how  far  we  can  not  say. 

We  are  safe,  therefore,  in  saying  that  Jesus  claims 
to  be  the  Son  of  God  in  a  unique  sense.  We  can 
mark  the  lines  of  demarkation  which  separate  him 
from  us  on  the  lower  side.  We  have  no  means  of 
determining  how  far  he  transcends  us  on  the  divine 
side;  and  surely,  no  one  is  justified,  on  the  basis 
of  the  Synoptic  teaching,  in  denying  the  Pauline 
and  the  Johannine  interpretation.  The  Synoptists 
may  not  give  us  the  evidence  out  of  the  mouth  of 
Jesus  for  affirming  that  doctrine ;  but  they  certainly 
do  not  give  us  the  evidence  for  denying  it.  They 
do  give  us  an  estimate  of  the  greatness  of  Jesus, 
which  naturally  suggests  the  later  doctrine.  They 
represent  him  as  standing  in  a  peculiar  and  unique 
relation  to  God,  a  relation  which  so  far  transcends 
all  we  know  that  we  have  no  way  of  limiting  his 
transcendent  greatness. 


178        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

2.    The  Messianic  Consciousness 

If  such  was  the  conception  of  Jesus  with  refer- 
ence to  his  relation  to  God,  what  did  he  conceive  his 
relation  to  the  kingdom  to  be  ? 

In  turning  to  this  side  of  the  self-consciousness  of 
Jesus,  the  student  notices  a  second  fact.  Jesus  al- 
ways acted  under  the  consciousness  of  a  mission.  He 
felt  himself  called  with  a  high  and  holy  calling. 
This  is  suggested  already  in  that  expression  which 
comes  from  the  lips  of  the  boy  Jesus,  especially  if 
we  adopt  the  expressive  rendering  of  the  Authorized 
Version :  "  Wist  ye  not  that  I  must  be  about  my 
Father's  business''  (Lk.  2:49).  And  it  recurs 
again  and  again  in  his  subsequent  teaching.  He 
speaks  of  himself  as  '^  sent."  '^  He  that  receiveth 
you  receiveth  me,  and  he  that  receiveth  me  receiveth 
him  that  sent  me"  (Mt.  10:40;  Lk.  9:48).  "I 
was  not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house 
of  Israel"  (Mt.  15:24).  So  he  speaks  of  himself 
as  having  "  come  "  for  the  accomplishment  of  a  spe- 
cific purpose.  "  I  came  to  cast  fire  upon  the  earth  " 
(Lk.  12:49).  "For  the  Son  of  man  came  to  seek 
and  to  save  that  which  was  lost  "  (Lk.  19 :  10). 

^ow  there  is  undoubtedly  a  connection  between 
this  consciousness  of  a  mission  and  his  consciousness 
of  sonship.  Because  he  felt  himself  to  be  God's  Son, 
he  also  felt  himself  called  to  a  specific  work  in  the 
accomplishment  of  the  Father's  purpose.  He  knew 
the  Father's  will  perfectly;  he  was  fully  consecrated 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM         179 

to  the  accomplislnnent  of  that  will;  and  knowing 
that  that  will  is  love,  yearning  for  the  salvation  of 
all  the  lost,  he  could  not  but  feel  himself  called  to 
the  great  task  of  realizing  that  will  in  the  salvation 
of  men. 

What,  then,  did  Jesus  conceive  his  mission  to  be  ? 
Had  he  simply  come  to  proclaim  that  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  at  hand  ?  Or  did  he  feel  his  mission  to  be 
also  that  of  establishing  it  among  men?  Did  he 
claim  to  be  the  Messiah,  God's  Anointed  ? 

That  Jesus  believed  himself  to  be  something  more 
than  the  herald  of  the  coming  kingdom  is  clear. 
That  he  conceived  of  himself  as  the  actual  foimder 
of  the  kingdom  appears  from  the  following  consid- 
erations : 

1)  Jesus  came  both  to  reveal  and  to  accomplish 
the  will  of  God.  This  is  explicitly  stated  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel.  "  For  I  am  come  down  from  heaven, 
not  to  do  mine  own  will,  but  the  will  of  him  that 
sent  me  "  (Jn.  6  :  38).  "  My  meat  is  to  do  the  will 
of  him  that  sent  me  "  ( Jn.  4 :  34).  And  it  is  clearly 
implied  in  the  Synoptic  teaching.  "  It  is  written, 
Man  shall  not  live  by  bread  alone,  but  by  every  word 
that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  God "  (Mt. 
4:4);  and  that  was  not  simply  the  principle  on 
which  he  resisted  the  temptation  in  the  wilderness, 
but  it  was  the  guiding  star  of  his  entire  life.  In 
the  last  great  struggle  of  his  life  he  exclaimed,  "  l^ot 
what  I  will  but  what  thou  wilt  "  (Mk.  14 :  36).  And 
that  is  what  he  taught  the  disciples  to  crave.     "  Thy 


180        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

will  be  done  on  earth,  as  it  is  in  heaven  ''  (Mt.  6 :  10) . 
Every  one  who  does  that  will,  he  taught,  is  entering 
the  kingdom  (Mt.  7:21).  Now,  in  as  far  as  the 
kingdom  consists  of  the  rule  of  God  in  the  hearts 
of  men,  Jesus  actually  established  it  through  his 
own  obedience,  through  his  revelation  of  it  to  tht 
disciples,  and  by  leading  them  to  the  beginnings  oi 
a  similar  life  of  obedience. 

2)  Jesus  came  to  bring  salvation  (Lk.  19:10;. 
But  being  saved  is  equivalent  to  entering  the  king- 
dom (Mk.  10:23,  26).  It  includes  the  forgiveness 
of  sin  on  the  one  side,  and  eternal  life  on  the  other. 
That  Jesus  claimed  authority  to  forgive  sins,  and 
that  he  actually  exercised  that  authority  is  clear 
from  the  manner  in  which  he  healed  the  man  who 
was  sick  of  the  palsy  (Mk.  2:  9,  10).  And  that  he 
claimed  the  power  to  give  eternal  life  is  apparent 
from  his  conversation  with  the  rich  young  ruler  (Mk. 
10:17,  21).  But  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  the 
gift  of  eternal  life  are,  as  we  saw  above,  the  two 
great  factors  in  the  blessings  which  constitute  the 
kingdom  in  its  objective  sense. 

3)  Once  more,  Jesus  founded  the  brotherhood, 
which  became  the  nucleus  of  that  spiritual  common- 
wealth through  which  the  kingdom  of  God  is  being 
realized  among  men.  The  question  has  been  raised 
whether  Jesus  came  to  establish  a  church.  The  an- 
swer depends  on  the  meaning  which  we  put  into  the 
word.  If  we  regard  it  as  a  spiritual  commonwealth, 
a  brotherhood  in  which  his  Spirit  dwells,  then  there 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM        181 

can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  answer  wbich  must  be 
given.  We  know  that  he  did  establish  such  a  brother- 
hood even  during  the  days  of  his  flesh.  He  left  to 
the  brotherhood  the  authority  of  binding  and  loosing, 
the  power  of  deciding  for  itself  what  should  be  valid 
and  what  invalid  in  the  establishment  of  its  own 
orders.  He  himself  did  not  ordain  bishops  and 
priests,  with  certain  rights  and  privileges  to  be 
handed  down  from  generation  to  generation  by  a 
sort  of  tactual  succession;  all  that  he  left  to  the 
brotherhood  to  determine  as  might  seem  best  under 
given  circumstances.  But  he  established  the  brother- 
hood, and  he  inspired  that  brotherhood  with  ideals, 
which,  when  realized,  would  also  realize  the  king- 
dom of  God  on  earth.  But  that  is  only  saying  in 
another  form  that  he  actually  founded  the  kingdom 
in  a  real,  outward  form. 

But  does  all  this  now  mean  that  Jesus  was  the 
Messiah,  and  that  in  exercising  these  high  preroga- 
tives he  laid  claim  to  that  distinction  ? 

It  may  be  well  here  to  recall  what  was  said  at  the 
beginning  of  this  chapter.  Throughout  the  Old 
Testament  there  are  two  lines  of  prophecy  with  refer- 
ence to  the  kingdom.  The  one  connects  the  coming 
of  the  kingdom  with  the  personal  coming  of  Jehovah 
himself ;  the  other  looks  for  the  establishment  of  the 
kingdom  through  the  mighty  Son  of  David.  He  is 
looked  upon  as  the  founder  of  the  kingdom  on  the 
human  side — not,  of  course,  apart  from  the  power 
of  God,  but  through  the  help  of  the  outstretched  arm 


182        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

of  the  Almighty.  ^Now,  that  Son  of  David  is  every- 
where spoken  of  as  the  Lord's  anointed.  He  is  con- 
ceived as  able  to  accomplish  all  that  the  prophets 
hoped  for  just  because  he  is  the  Lord's  anointed, 
endued  with  power  from  on  high  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  his  mighty  task.  In  other  words,  the  founder 
of  the  kingdom  was  to  be  none  other  than  the  Mes- 
siah; and  the  question  comes  back  to  us,  Can  Jesus 
have  consciously  founded  the  kingdom  of  God  with- 
out at  the  same  time  being  conscious  of  being  the 
Messiah  ? 

If  there  is  anything  clear  in  early  Christian  his- 
tory, it  is  that  the  disciples  from  the  very  beginning 
looked  upon  Jesus  as  the  Christ.  It  is  true,  they 
were  for  the  moment  confounded  by  the  tragic  issue 
of  his  controversy  with  his  adversaries;  and  the  two 
disciples  on  their  way  to  Emmaus  were  led  to  say, 
^'  But  we  hoped  that  it  was  he  who  should  redeem 
Israel"  (Lk.  24:21),  as  if  despair  had  crept  into 
their  hearts.  But  no  sooner  did  they  have  their 
vision  of  the  risen  Lord  than  their  hope  revived; 
and  they  were  ready  now  to  ask,  "Lord,  dost  thou 
at  this  time  restore  the  kingdom  to  Israel "  (Acts 
1:6).  And  that  was  the  message  which  was  the 
central  theme  of  the  very  first  preaching  of  the  apos- 
tles at  Jerusalem  (Acts  2  :  36).  ^ow,  with  reference 
to  all  this  the  question  arises,  How  can  we  conceive 
of  this  conviction  on  the  part  of  the  disciples,  if 
Jesus  had  not  in  some  way  declared  to  them  his  own 
conviction  that  he  was  the  Messiah?    On  this  point 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM         183 

Professor  W.  Bousset  has  aptly  argued,  ''  We  have 
certain  knowledge  that  the  belief  existed  from  the 
very  beginning  among  the  Christian  community  that 
Jesus  was  the  Messiah,  and,  arguing  backward,  we 
can  assert  that  the  rise  of  such  a  belief  would  be 
absolutely  inexplicable  if  Jesus  had  not  declared  in 
his  lifetime  that  he  was  the  Messiah.  It  is  quite 
conceivable  that  the  first  disciples  of  Jesus,  who  by 
his  death  and  burial  had  seen  all  their  hopes  shat- 
tered and  their  belief  in  his  Messiahship  destroyed, 
might  have  returned  to  that  belief  under  the  influence 
of  their  resurrection  experiences,  if  they  had  for- 
merly possessed  it  on  the  ground  of  the  utterances 
and  general  conduct  of  Jesus.  But  it  would  be 
wholly  incomprehensible  that  that  belief  should  have 
originated  in  their  hearts  after  the  catastrophe,  for 
in  that  case  we  must  assume  that  those  marvellous 
experiences  of  the  Easter  days  produced  something 
completely  new  in  the  disciples'  souls  by  a  process  of 
magic,  and  without  any  psychological  preparation."  ^ 

3.    The  Lordship  of  Jesus 

But  we  are  not  compelled  to  rest  on  inference  and 
conjecture.  Jesus  himself  declared  his  Messiahship 
in  unequivocal  terms.  When  he  stood  before  the 
council,  the  high  priest  asked  him,  "  Art  thou  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  the  Blessed T'  (Mk.  14:  61).  It 
was  the  question  which  had  been  discussed  by  the 

^  Jesus,  pp.  168,  169. 


184j        the  supreme  REVELATION 

chief  priests  and  elders.  It  was  on  everybody's  lips. 
The  reply  which  Jesus  gave  to  it  is,  therefore,  the 
more  noteworthy.  ^'  I  am,''  he  said ;  ^'  and  ye  shall 
see  the  Son  of  man  sitting  on  the  right  hand  of  Power, 
and  coming  with  the  clouds  of  heaven "  (Mk. 
14:  62).  It  was  the  ground  on  which  the  Sanhedrim 
condemned  him;  and  it  was  back  of  the  accusation 
which  Pilate,  in  mockery,  caused  to  be  affixed  to  the 
cross. 

Now,  this  answer  contains  a  double  affirmation — 
the  affirmation  of  his  Messiahship,  and  the  affirmation 
of  his  lordship  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  latter  is, 
indeed,  implied  in  the  former;  and  it  is  the  form 
in  which  that  is  exercised.  Only  the  Messiah  can 
be  Lord  in  the  kingdom  of  God ;  for  only  he  can  be 
lawgiver,  ruler,  and  judge  within  its  sacred  confines. 
And  by  noting  how  Jesus  laid  claim  to  the  exercise 
of  these  mighty  prerogatives,  we  get  our  final  proof 
that  he  believed  himself  to  be  the  Messiah. 

As  noted  elsewhere,  Jesus  consciously  placed  him- 
self among  the  prophets  (Mt.  13:  57).  He  did  not 
in  the  same  way  explicitly  assume  the  role  of  legis- 
lator; and  he  did  not  leave  behind  him  a  body  of 
laws,  like  Moses,  Solon,  or  Lycurgus,  which  were 
afterwards  to  be  observed  in  an  outward  or  legalistic 
sense.  But  he  laid  down  certain  principles  of  con- 
duct, which  he  sought  to  introduce  as  controlling 
principles  into  men's  hearts,  and  which  were  to  gov- 
ern their  conduct  from  within.  He  took  the  old  pre- 
cepts of  the  Mosaic  law;  and  by  pointing  out  the 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM         185 

motive  out  of  which  all  true  obedience  must  spring, 
he  gave  them  new  meaning  and  authority.  He 
quietly  and  without  apology  assumed  the  place  of 
authoritative  expounder  of  the  old  law;  yea,  he 
placed  his  own  word  alongside  of  and  above  that  of 
Moses  and  the  prophets.  "  Ye  have  heard  that  it 
was  said  to  them  of  old  time  " ;  and  with  that  formula 
he  referred  to  some  of  the  most  important  of  the 
laws  of  Moses,  those  of  murder,  adultery,  the  oath, 
and  retaliation.  In  each  case  he  followed  the  refer- 
ence with  '^  But  I  say  unto  you  '' ;  and  he  either  gave 
the  old  law  a  new  and  wider  application,  or  showed 
how  it  was  lifted  up  and  lost  in  a  new  and  higher 
law. 

And  more  than  this.  Jesus  laid  claim  to  actual 
sovereignty  in  the  kingdom.  "  And  ye  shall  see  the 
Son  of  man  sitting  on  the  right  hand  of  Power,  and 
coming  on  the  clouds  of  heaven."  "  The  right  hand 
of  Power ''  can  mean  only  one  thing.  It  can  only 
mean  that  Jesus  claimed  to  be  invested  with  divine 
authority.  From  that  time  on  he  claimed  the  right 
to  exercise  the  authority  of  the  Most  High.  And  to 
this  the  other  expression,  "  coming  with  the  clouds 
of  heaven,"  likewise  points.  It  does  not  refer  to  a 
supposed  outward  second  coming  on  the  clouds  of 
heaven.  It  is  an  apocalyptic  expression,  meaning 
that  he  would  henceforth  be  clothed  with  the  author- 
ity and  power  of  the  Almighty.  Like  the  statement 
in  Mark  13:36,  it  must  be  interpreted  in  accord- 
ance with  the  apocalyptic  usage  of  the  Old  Testa- 


186         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

ment.  When,  for  instance,  we  read  in  Isaiah  19 : 1, 
that  '^  Jehovah  rideth  upon  a  swift  cloud,  and  cometh 
into  Egypt,''  the  meaning  is  that  God  was  about  to 
exercise  his  dominion  and  power  over  Egypt,  so  that 
the  idols  of  Egypt  should  tremble,  and  the  heart  of 
Egypt  melt  like  wax  in  the  midst  of  it.  The  same 
thought  occurs  in  Psalm  97:1,  2. 

"Jehovah  reigneth;  let  the  earth  rejoice; 
Let  the  multitudes  of  the  isles  be  glad. 
Clouds  and  darkness  are  round  about  him; 
Righteousness  and  justice  are  the  foundation  of  his  throne." 

And  so  in  many  places  (See  Ps.  18:5-16;  Zech. 
9 :  14 ;  Dan.  7 :  13).  When  God  comes  to  exercise  his 
dominion,  he  is  represented  as  coming  with  the 
clouds  of  heaven.  And  so  when  Jesus  speaks  of 
coming  with  the  clouds  of  heaven,  the  meaning  is 
that  he  comes,  clothed  with  divine  authority  and 
power,  and  that  he  is  the  divinely  appointed  ruler 
in  the  kingdom  of  God. 

According  to  Matthew  the  statement  is  introduced 
by  '^  henceforth "  (Mt.  26:64).  And  Luke  has  a 
similar  modification  of  the  saying  in  Mark.  The 
meaning  is  that  Jesus  would  from  that  day  on  exer- 
cise such  dominion.  And  were  this  the  place  for  it, 
we  might  vindicate  the  high  claim  by  an  appeal  to 
history ;  for,  although  there  are  still  many  people  who 
do  not  recognize  Jesus  as  Lord,  his  lordship  is  freely 
and  cheerfully  recognized  by  all  who  are  in  the  king- 
dom.    Wherever  men  have  any  realizing  sense  of 


FOUNDER  OF  THE  KINGDOM        187 

truth   and  righteousness,  there  his  law  of  love   is 
freely  accepted  as  supreme. 

Jesus  likewise  claimed  authority  to  execute  judg- 
ment. Usually  this  is  understood  as  referring  to 
the  end  of  the  world ;  and  the  judgment  progTamme, 
which  is  outlined,  in  the  twenty-fifth  chapter  of  Mat- 
thew, probably  refers  primarily  to  that.  But  there 
is  evidence  that  Jesus  also  thought  of  the  judgment 
as  a  present  process,  and  of  himself  as  exercising  the 
functions  of  Judge  even  now.  That  thought  seems  to 
be  especially  implied  in  the  teaching  which  we  find 
at  the  close  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  "  Every 
one  therefore  that  heareth  these  words  of  mine,  and 
doeth  them,  shall  be  likened  unto  a  wise  man,  who 
built  his  house  on  a  rock:  and  the  rain  descended, 
and  the  floods  came,  and  the  winds  blew,  and  beat 
upon  that  house ;  and  it  fell  not ;  for  it  was  founded 
on  a  rock''  (Mt.  7:  24,  25).  Together  with  the  op- 
posite picture,  which  follows  immediately  after  this, 
the  teaching  contains  a  tremendous  claim  on  the  part 
of  Jesus,  the  claim,  namely,  that  his  teaching  is  of 
such  authority  that  its  acceptance  or  rejection  con- 
stitutes the  reason  why  a  man  finds  admittance  into 
the  kingdom,  or  is  rejected  therefrom.  Acceptance 
of  his  word  results  in  the  formation  of  a  character, 
which  will  stand  in  the  midst  the  stress  and  storms 
of  life ;  as  a  house  that  is  founded  on  a  rock  stands 
in  the  midst  of  a  storm.  But  that  implies  that  Jesus 
sits  as  Judge  or  Arbiter  in  the  midst  of  history,  and 
that  he  and  his  word  are  the  ever-present  power  by 


188        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

which  men  are  judged,  or  perhaps  better,  bj  which 
they  judge  themselves. 

In  one  passage  Jesus  proclaims  himself  as  Judge 
in  unmistakable  terms.  It  is  the  great  judgment  pro- 
gramme in  Matthew  25  :  31-46.  He  there  represents 
himself  as  seated  on  the  throne  of  the  universe,  with 
all  nations  assembled  before  him,  and  as  separating 
them  one  from  the  other  as  a  shepherd  separates  the 
sheep  from  the  goats.  The  righteous  are  welcomed 
to  his  right  hand,  with  the  welcome  plaudit,  ^'  Well 
done  " ;  while  the  wicked  are  sent  to  the  left,  with 
the  terrible  condemnation,  "  Depart  from  me,  ye 
cursed."  And  the  one  are  shown  to  be  righteous, 
because  they  had  been  obedient  to  his  word;  while 
the  other  are  shown  to  be  unrighteous,  because  they 
had  not  been  so.  That  is,  the  attitude  which  men 
assume  with  reference  to  him  and  his  word  forms 
the  basis  on  which  they  will  be  judged  in  the  last  day. 


YIII 
THE  rOUOTDIXG  OF  THE  KmGDOM 

AS  Messiah,  Jesus  consciously  accepted  as  his 
mission  the  great  task  of  founding  the  king- 
dom of  God.  To  that  he  consecrated  himself 
with  whole-hearted  devotion.  How  did  he  conceive 
his  task  ?  What  did  he  think  of  the  work  necessary 
to  its  accomplishment  ?  To  answer  these  questions, 
we  must  study  his  teaching  on  the  background  of  his 
life.  Here,  as  perhaps  nowhere  else,  his  work  sheds 
light  on  his  words. 

The  kingdom  had  to  he  established  in  the  midst 
of  a  sinful  and  hostile  world.  It  had.,  to  be  founded 
in  the  face  of  misunderstanding  and  opposition. 
Consequently  the  first  thing  that  had  to  be  done  was 
to  overcome  certain  difficulties,  and  remove  certain 
obstacles  out  of  the  way. 

1.    Correcting  Misapprehensions 

Foremost  among  the  obstacles  which  hindered  the 
establishment  of  the  kingdom  was  the  universal  mis- 
apprehension of  its  true  nature  on  the  part  of  the 
people.  There  existed  a  widespread  expectation  of 
the  kingdom.     Somehow  the  people  had  come  to  be- 

189 


190        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

lieve  that  the  long-expected  Messiah  was  about  to 
appear;  but  they  had  sadly  misconceived  his  true 
character  and  mission.  They  looked  for  an  outward, 
material,  and  political  kingdom,  in  which  the  hated 
Roman  yoke  should  be  thrown  off,  and  in  which  the 
riches  and  the  glories  of  this  world  were  to  flow  into 
Zion,  bringing  to  them,  as  the  chosen  people,  the  com- 
forts and  pleasures  of  time  and  sense.  Even  the  dis- 
ciples, whom  Jesus  had  chosen  to  be  with  him  and 
to  become  his  representatives,  entertained  this  idea; 
and  it  was  not  until  after  his  crucifixion  and  resur- 
rection that  they  were  enabled  to  escape  the  delusive 
snare. 

One  only  needs  to  study  the  decisive  crisis  of  his 
own  life  to  realize  how  formidable  an  obstacle  this 
misconception  was. 

Immediately  after  his  Messianic  ordination,  when 
he  had  just  come  to  a  full  realization  of  his  great 
mission,  he  was  called  to  confront  this  great  per- 
version of  the  Messianic  ideal.  As  Mark  has  so 
forcibly  put  it,  "  And  straightway  the  Spirit  driveth 
him  forth  into  the  wilderness.  And  he  was  in  the 
wilderness  forty  days  tempted  of  Satan  ''  (Mk.  1 :  12, 
13).  It  could  not  have  been  otherwise.  In  view  of 
the  great  mission  which  now  opened  out  before  him, 
he  had  to  come  to  an  understanding  as  to  the 
method  by  which  his  work  was  to  be  accomplished. 
He  knew  the  false  Messianic  ideal  which  had  taken 
possession  of  his  people;  and  he  could  not  help 
being   confronted   by   it   in   all    his    tbinking.      It 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM        191 

formed  the  burden  in  his  great  temptation.  Should 
he  yield  to  the  popular  desire  to  establish  an  outward 
kingdom  of  prosperity  and  plenty?  And  should  he 
use  his  marvellous  powers,  of  which  he  was  just 
becoming  conscious,  to  bring  about  that  condition  for 
which  his  people  were  looking  and  longing  1  Should 
he,  as  if  by  magic,  turn  the  wilderness  of  this  world 
into  a  paradise  of  ease  and  luxury  1  'No ;  that  would 
be  to  overlook  all  the  higher  needs  of  man's  life,  his 
need  for  food  which  only  the  Word  of  God  can  give 
(Mt.  4:4).  Or  should  he  yield  to  the  popular  de- 
mand for  the  spectacular,  and  by  marvellous  feats 
satisfy  the  craving  of  the  curious,  in  the  expectation 
that  God  would  bring  him  safely  through  to  the  suc- 
cessful accomplishment  of  his  mission?  No;  that 
would  be  to  tempt  God  (Mt.  4:7).  Should  he  then 
consent  to  the  employment  of  illegitimate  means  for 
gaining  an  influence  over  the  people  in  the  hope  that, 
after  he  had  won  his  way  to  the  throne,  he  might 
transform  the  kingdom,  thus  established,  into  a 
divine  rule  over  men?  Should  he  make  a  compro- 
mise with  the  rulers  of  his  people  in  order  later  on, 
when  he  had  gained  position,  influence,  and  power, 
to  use  them  for  higher  and  nobler  ends?  No;  that 
would  be  to  give  away  the  whole  idea  of  the  king- 
dom from  the  beginning.  It  would  be  to  exalt  the 
wrong  into  the  place  of  the  right,  to  worship  Satan 
rather  than  God  (Mk.  4: 10).  It  was  in  some  such 
way  that  the  false  Messianic  ideal  appealed  to  him; 
and   how   powerful   the   appeal   was    appears   from 


19^        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

the  fact  that  he  wrestled  with  the  problem,  by 
prayer  and  fasting,  for  forty  days  and  forty 
nights. 

But  if  such  was  the  struggle  required  to  remove 
the  false  ideal  from  his  own  spotless  soul,  what  must 
it  have  required  to  deliver  his  nation  from  it  ?  He 
first  tried  teaching.  He  taught  in  their  synagogues, 
by  the  seaside,  in  their  streets,  on  the  mountain  top, 
— everywhere  where  people  gathered  to  hear  him. 
But  the  people  would  not  understand.  Their  foolish 
hearts  were  darkened.  When  after  nearly  a  whole 
year's  work  in  Galilee,  he  finally  sent  forth  the 
Twelve  to  preach  that  the  kingdom  was  nigh,  they 
only  thought  the  more  of  their  hoped-for  earthly 
kingdom.  Probably  the  disciples  coloured  their 
message  with  their  own  misconceptions;  and  when 
they  finally  gathered  themselves  together  again  to 
the  Master,  they  were  so  thronged  by  the  multitudes 
in  their  eager  expectancy  that  they  had  not  time  so 
much  as  to  eat  bread  (Mk.  6 :  31).  The  people  were 
coming  and  going;  and  the  meaning  of  their  excite- 
ment became  apparent  the  following  day,  when,  after 
the  miracle  of  the  loaves  and  fishes,  they  attempted 
to  take  him  by  force  to  make  him  a  king  ( Jn.  6 :  15). 
When  he  refused  the  proffered  crown,  they  went 
back  and  left  him  alone  with  the  Twelve.  Though 
his  ministry  continued  for  another  year,  his  fate  was 
sealed  from  that  hour.  The  cross  now  loomed  darkly 
above  his  horizon;  and  as  is  apparent  from  the  con- 
versation at  Csesarea  Philippi,  he  knew  it.    Rather 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM       19S 

than  forsake  their  false  ideal,  his  people  were  willing 
to  reject  him  and  to  nail  him  to  the  cross.  Even  the 
subsequent  overthrow  of  Jerusalem  and  the  temple 
did  not  suffice  to  deliver  the  people  as  a  whole  from 
the  false  ideal.  The  Twelve  were  finally  delivered 
from  it  by  his  persistent  teaching,  and  by  the  experi- 
ences which  came  to  them  through  his  death  and 
resurrection.  But  it  required  all  the  teaching  of  his 
ministry,  together  with  those  experiences,  to  bring 
about  the  deliverance. 


2.    Forgiving  Sin 

But  great  as  was  the  obstacle  w^hich  these  miscon- 
ceptions of  the  Jewish  people  had  placed  in  his  way, 
they  were  not  the  greatest  hindrance  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  kingdom.  The  ignorances  and 
prejudices  of  the  people  were  themselves  the  fruit 
of  a  deeper  malady.  The  people  as  a  whole  had  sub- 
mitted themselves  to  a  rule  other  than  that  of  God. 
They  had  sinned  and  were  guilty  before  God.  Before 
they  could  be  brought  under  the  divine  rule,  their 
guilt  had  to  be  pardoned,  their  sins  forgiven.  Hence 
forgiveness  had  long  been  associated  by  the  prophets 
with  the  Messianic  hope  (Isa.  40 :  2)  ;  hence  also 
John  the  Baptist,  when  he  began  his  ministry, 
preached  "  the  baptism  of  repentance  unto  remission 
of  sins"  (Mk.  1:4).  And  so  when  Jesus  began  his 
Galilean  ministry,  he  proclaimed  the  same  message. 
He  called  the  people  to  repentance;  and  repentance 


194        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

was,   as   it  is  now,  the   indispensable  condition  to 
forgiveness. 

'No  inconsiderable  portion  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus 
was  devoted  to  the  proclamation  of  the  glorious  fact 
of  the  divine  offer  of  forgiveness.  He  proclaimed 
the  message  both  by  word  and  deed.  Mark  puts  into 
the  forefront  of  his  Gospel  a  miracle,  which  seems 
to  have  just  this  for  its  central  truth.  It  was  in  that 
beautiful  dawn  of  the  Galilean  spring,  when  the 
people  were  crowding  round  him  in  great  numbers  to 
hear  the  Word  of  God.  He  had  been  out  on  a 
preaching  tour  in  Galilee,  and  had  been  away  from 
home  some  days.  Then  when  on  his  return  it  be- 
came noised  abroad  that  he  was  at  home,  the  people 
so  filled  the  house  in  which  he  was  "  that  there  was 
no  more  room  for  them,  no,  not  even  about  the 
door."  A  paralytic  was  brought  to  him;  and  when 
those  that  were  carrying  him  were  not  able  to  get 
near  for  the  crowd,  they  let  him  down  through  the 
roof.  Wlien  Jesus  saw  their  faith,  he  at  once  ad- 
dressed the  man,  "  Son,  thy  sins  are  forgiven."  It 
was  probably  what  the  man  needed  and  longed  for 
much  more  than  bodily  health.  And  when  the  scribes 
who  were  present  reasoned  in  their  hearts,  saying, 
"  Why  doth  this  man  speak  thus  ?  he  blasphemeth : 
who  can  forgive  sins  but  one,  even  Gbd  " ;  he  demon- 
strated his  power  by  an  incontestable  sign,  showing 
that  "  the  Son  of  man  hath  authority  on  earth  to 
forgive  sins  "  (Mk.  2 :  1-12).  He  repeated  the  same 
great  lesson  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  Pharisee, 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM        195 

when  he  turned  to  the  woman  who  was  a  sinner, 
and  who  had  just  anointed  his  feet,  with  the  gracious 
benediction,  ^^  Thy  sins  are  forgiven''  (Lk.  7:48). 
So  he  taught  us  and  all  men  to  pray,  "  Forgive  us  our 
debts,"  with  the  assurance  that,  if  we  cultivate  the 
forgiving  spirit  in  our  hearts,  our  heavenly  Father 
will  forgive  us  (Mt.  6 :  14,  15). 

The  connection,  in  which  this  promise  is  given, 
suggests  what  Jesus  meant  by  forgiveness.  It  is  not 
simply  the  removal  of  the  penalty,  due  to  our  trans- 
gressions. It  involves  the  removal  of  the  sin  itself. 
So  much  is  implied  in  the  Greek  word  which  is  used 
to  express  the  notion  of  forgiveness.  That  is  acpeffi?^ 
and  is  derived  from  acpievai ;  and  this  means  to  send 
away,  to  remove.  Wherever  the  verb  is  used,  the 
object  is  the  sin  to  be  pardoned,  not  the  penalty  to 
be  removed.  Hence  the  form  in  which  the  promise, 
just  referred  to,  is  stated.  "  For  if  ye  forgive  men 
their  trespasses,  your  heavenly  Father  will  also  for- 
give you.  But  if  ye  forgive  not  men  their  trespasses, 
neither  will  your  Father  forgive  your  trespasses" 
(Mt.  6: 14,  15).  It  does  not  mean  that  the  ground 
of  our  forgiveness  is  found  in  the  fact  that  we  forgive 
those  who  have  trespassed  against  us.  That  is  found 
in  God  and  in  what  Jesus  Christ  has  accomplished 
for  us.  God  forgives  because  of  his  own  infinite 
compassion  and  love,  not  because  of  what  we  have 
done  or  can  do.  And  yet  his  forgiveness  is  condi- 
tioned on  the  disposition  which  his  forgiving  love 
may  be  able  to  awaken  in  our  hearts.     When  we 


196        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

refuse  to  allow  his  love  to  awaken  in  us  a  like  love, 
he  does  not  and  can  not  forgive;  and  that,  not  be- 
cause his  love  is  unwilling  to  grant  us  the  boon,  but 
because  it  can  not.  The  forgiveness  means  primarily 
the  removal  of  the  sin;  and  that  means  that  a  new 
impulse  of  love  must  be  awakened  in  our  hearts. 
Where  such  an  impulse  is  not  awakened,  forgiveness 
is  impossible,  and  that  because  the  individual  chooses 
to  hold  on  to  his  sin.  This  is  brought  out  in  the 
parable  of  the  Unmerciful  Servant.  He  had  ob- 
tained mercy;  but  he  refused  to  exercise  the  same 
mercy  towards  his  fellow-servant ;  and  hence  the  sen- 
tence of  forgiveness,  which  had  been  pronounced 
in  his  favour,  was  immediately  cancelled  (Mt. 
18:32-35). 

3.    His  Holy  Life 

Important  as  the  removal  of  these  obstacles  was, 
that  was  only  the  negative  side  of  the  great  work 
which  Jesus  had  undertaken.  After  the  obstacles 
were  removed,  the  rule  of  God  had  to  be  established 
in  the  hearts  of  men,  and  the  blessings  which  that 
rule  alone  can  bring  had  to  be  realized  in  human 
experiences. 

Inasmuch  as  the  kingdom  is  the  rule  of  God  in 
the  hearts  of  men,  its  founding  had  to  do  primar- 
ily with  human  personalities.  Whatever  blessings  it 
may  bring  are  such  only  as  can  be  realized  in  the 
hearts  and  experiences  of  men.  Hence  the  kingdom 
had  to  have  its  earthly  origin  in  a  human  personality  \ 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM        197 

and  human  personalities  became  the  seed  for  its 
propagation.  ^'  The  good  seed,  these  are  the  sons 
of  the  kingdom"  (Mt.  13:38).  The  kingdom  had 
its  earthly  origin  in  the  life  of  its  Founder.  He 
realized  the  divine  rule  first  of  all  in  his  own  life; 
and  he,  moreover,  realized  in  his  own  personal  ex- 
perience all  the  blessedness,  which  he  so  beautifully 
portrayed  as  belonging  to  the  citizen  of  the  kingdom. 

Throughout  the  Synoptic  narrative  this  side  of  the 
work  and  teaching  of  our  Lord  is  constantly  brought 
to  our  attention.  How  uniformly  it  is  asserted  that 
he  is  doing  God's  will !  How  constant  is  the  reitera- 
tion that  only  those  who  do  that  will  can  have  fellow- 
ship with  him !  The  first  glimpse  which  we  get  of 
his  inner  life  reveals  him  fully  consecrated  to  God's 
work.  ''  Wist  ye  not  that  I  must  be  about  the  things 
of  my  Father?"  (Lk.  2:49).  When  he  stood  in 
the  midst  of  the  great  crisis  of  his  own  life,  he  found 
his  very  meat  and  drink  in  every  word  that  proceeds 
out  of  the  mouth  of  God  (Mt.  4:4).  When  finally 
he  was  confronted  by  the  bitter  cup  of  agony,  and 
when  he  cried  out,  "  My  Father,  if  it  be  possible,  let 
this  cup  pass  from  me,"  he  yet  added,  ^'  l^evertheless, 
not  as  I  will,  but  as  thou  wilt  "  (Mt.  26 :  39).  And 
that  was  only  the  cro^vn  and  culmination  of  his 
entire  life.    It  was  the  way  in  which  he  had  lived. 

And  as  Jesus  had  thus  realized  the  divine  rule  in 
his  own  life,  so  he  insisted  on  its  realization  in  the 
lives  of  all  who  would  come  into  fellowship  with  him. 
"  Not  every  one  that  saith  unto  me,  Lord,  Lord,  shall 


198        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven;  but  he  that  doeth 
the  will  of  my  Father  in  heaven.  Eor  many  will 
say  unto  me  in  that  day,  did  we  not  prophesy  in 
thy  name,  and  in  thy  name  cast  out  demons,  and  by 
thy  name  do  many  mighty  works  ?  And  then  will 
I  profess  unto  them,  I  never  knew  you :  depart  from 
me  ye  that  work  iniquity''  (Mt.  7:21-23).  Not 
only  was  the  doing  of  the  Father's  will  the  pole  star 
of  his  own  life,  he  always  insisted  that  all  who 
would  stand  in  any  sort  of  fellowship  with  him 
should  follow  the  same  rule.  '^  Who  is  my  mother 
and  my  brethren  ?  And  looking  round  on  them  that 
sat  round  about  him,  he  saith,  Behold,  my  mother  and 
my  brethren!  For  whosoever  shall  do  the  will  of 
God,  the  same  is  my  brother,  and  sister,  and  mother  " 
(Mk.  3:31-35). 

The  same  result  is  obtained,  if  we  view  the  king- 
dom as  the  sum  total  of  the  blessings  which  the 
divine  rule  brings  unto  men.  These  are  first  of  all 
found  exemplified  in  his  own  personal  life.  The 
beatitudes  are  but  a  record  of  his  own  personal  ex- 
perience. There  is  not  one  of  them  which  a  close 
study  of  his  life  does  not  reveal.  Take  but  a  single 
one  as  an  illustration.  He  had  the  blessedness  of 
the  pure  in  heart.  He  had  the  vision  of  God;  and 
to  such  an  extent  that  it  was  possible  for  him  to 
claim  that  unique  knowledge  of  God,  which  has  made 
him  the  sole  Mediator  between  God  and  men. 

So  too  if  we  view  the  kingdom  as  the  society  of 
those  who  are  under  the  divine  rule.     He  was  from 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM        199 

the  beginning  the  head  and  centre  of  that  mystic 
brotherhood,  which  has  been  dimly  realizing  the  ideal 
of  his  own  life.  It  was  the  spark  of  love  which  he 
kindled  in  their  hearts,  and  which  has  been  com- 
municated from  life  to  life  since  then,  that  lies  at 
the  basis  of  all  that  is  God-like  in  human  history. 

It  was  hence  in  his  own  personality,  in  his  holy 
life,  and  in  the  aspiration  to  holy  living  which  he 
inspired  in  his  followers  and  through  them  in  men 
generally,  that  we  find  the  beginnings  of  the  king- 
dom of  God  on  earth.  His  own.  loving  obedience  was 
the  positive  factor  which  lay  at  the  basis  of  his  great 
work  in  founding  the  kingdom,  just  as  the  forgive- 
ness of  sin  was  its  negative  factor.  And  when  once 
we  have  realized  fully  how  much  was  involved  in 
that  life  of  obedience,  how  much  he  had  to  do  and 
suffer  in  obeying  that  will  in  the  midst  of.  a  sinful 
world  like  this,  and  in  inspiring  other  men  to  a  life 
of  obedience,  we  shall  be  in  a  position  to  understand 
what  was  implied  in  his  mighty  task. 

4.    His  Sacrificial  Death 

How  great  this  task  of  founding  the  kingdom 
through  a  life  of  loving  obedience  really  was,  we 
may  see  if  we  study  the  significance  of  his  death. 
Though  we  have  very  little  specific  teaching  on  the 
subject,  until  we  reach  the  scene  at  Caesarea  Philippi, 
and  although  there  are  only  a  few  specific  utterances 
with  reference  to  it  after  that  period,  we  have  yet 


200         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

enougli  to  convince  us  that  Jesus  clearly  foresaw  the 
tragic  issue  of  his  life.  He  probably  foresaw  the 
necessity  of  his  death  long  before  he  began  to  teach 
the  disciples  about  it.  Indeed,  there  are  indications 
that  he  looked  forward  to  some  such  outcome  of  his 
work  from  the  very  beginning.  Certainly,  as  he 
approached  the  awful  hour  of  his  sacrifice,  he  had 
the  consciousness  that  he  could  fulfil  his  great  mis- 
sion only  by  giving  his  life  a  ransom  for  many  (Mk. 
10:45).  What  was  the  significance  which  he  him- 
self attached  to  his  death  ? 

1)  We  note  first  of  all  what  Jesus  himself  said 
about  the  necessity  of  his  death.  The  saying  belongs 
to  an  important  turning-point  in  his  life,  and  is  re- 
corded by  all  three  of  the  Synoptics.  It  was  at  the 
end  of  that  period  of  retirement,  into  which  he  had 
withdrawn  with  the  Twelve  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
them  instruction  and  of  training  them  for  the  great 
work  and  the  great  trials  which  awaited  them.  As 
the  culmination  of  that  period  of  training,  he  had 
just  drawn  from  them  a  confession  that  he  was  the 
Christ.  Then,  in  order  that  they  might  not  enter- 
tain any  false  hopes,  he  ''  began  to  show  unto  his 
disciples,  that  he  must  go  unto  Jerusalem,  and  suffer 
many  things  of  the  elders  and  chief  priests  and 
scribes,  and  be  killed,  and  the  third  day  be  raised 
up  "  (Mt.  16:  21).  Each  one  of  the  Synoptists  has 
that  "must''  (Mk.  8:31;  Lk.  9:22).  What  does 
it  signify? 

There  can  be  no  question  but  that  Jesus  had  come 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM        201 

to  recognize  that,  if  lie  would  accomplish  his  great 
task,  he  must  give  his  life.  From  that  there  was 
no  escape.  Still  the  question  remains,  How  did  he 
conceive  of  the  necessity  which  was  thus  upon  him  ? 
Was  it  a  necessity  growing  out  of  the  circumstances 
in  which  he  found  himself,  a  hard  lot  which  his  ene- 
mies forced  upon  him  ?  Or  was  it  a  part  of  his  God- 
given  task,  a  work  which  he  must  perform  in  the 
accomplishment  of  his  mission  ? 

It  is  easy  enough  to  affirm  that  it  was  the  former. 
Jesus  had  incurred  the  implacable  hatred  of  the 
scribes  and  Pharisees.  His  ideals  were  the  polar 
opposite  of  theirs.  They  could  not  and  they  would 
not  understand  him.  The  message  which  he  had  de- 
clared unto  them  was  an  offense.  They  wanted  a 
Messiah,  were  supremely  anxious  for  his  appearance, 
but  a  Messiah  of  a  totally  different  kind  from  him. 
They  looked  upon  his  claims  as  blasphemous.  As 
he  would  use  no  force  to  coerce  them  into  his  way 
of  thinking,  there  remained  only  one  alternative. 
Either  he  must  convince  them  and  so  win  them,  or 
else  they  must  crush  him.  It  is  probable  that  Jesus 
had  long  foreseen  this  issue,  even  if  he  did  not  have 
it  consciously  before  his  mind  from  the  very  begin- 
ning of  his  ministry;  and  after  the  Galilean  crisis, 
it  must  have  stood  out  in  ever  clearer  and  clearer 
form.  To  be  true  to  his  ideals,  to  be  true  to  his  mis- 
sion as  he  conceived  it,  he  must  be  prepared  to  endure 
the  utmost  which  their  opposition  and  hatred  could 
bring  upon  him.     And  we  thus  get  as  the  first  point 


202        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

in  the  significance  of  his  death,  that  it  partook  of  the 
nature  of  a  martyrdom.  He  had  to  die  in  order  that 
he  might  bear  witness  unto  the  truth. 

But  clear  as  this  fact  is,  it  is  also  just  as  clear 
that  it  does  not  exhaust  this  divine  necessity  for  his 
death.  As  we  follow  the  subsequent  teaching,  it  be- 
comes ever  clearer  that  Jesus  felt  a  deeper  constraint 
than  that.  Somehow  he  felt  that  God  had  laid  this 
necessity  upon  him,  and  that  dying  for  men  was 
part  of  his  mighty  task.  This  is  perhaps  brought 
out  nowhere  more  clearly  than  in  the  prayer  in  the 
garden.  Jesus  was  now  under  the  very  shadow  of 
the  cross.  The  unspeakable  horror  of  the  crucifixion 
filled  his  soul.  His  whole  humanity  shrank  from  the 
terrible  ordeal.  His  soul  was  sorrowful  unto  death 
(Mt.  26 :  38).  In  his  agony  he  cried  out,  ''  My  Fa- 
ther, if  it  be  possible,  let  this  cup  pass  away  from 
me."  Yet  he  did  not  even  in  that  hour  allow  that 
to  become  the  supreme  desire  of  his  heart.  He  still 
wished  above  all  else  to  do  the  Father's  will.  Hence 
the  prayer  closed  with  the  fervent  petition,  '^  Never- 
theless, not  as  I  will,  but  as  thou  wilt''  (Mt.  26 :  39). 
And  it  was  through  that  afiirmation  of  the  Father's 
will  that  the  agony  was  lifted,  and  that  he  was  en- 
abled to  go  forward  unflinchingly  to  meet  the  death 
which  was  before  him.  All  that,  however,  implies 
that  he  saw  a  divine  necessity  for  his  death.  He 
could  realize  the  divine  will  with  reference  to  him 
only  by  accepting  the  bitter  cup  and  drinking  it  to 
its  dregs.    The  necessity  for  his  death  was  not  simply 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM        203 

an  outward  necessity  laid  upon  him  by  the  circum- 
stances in  which  he  was  placed;  it  was  much  more 
an  inner  necessity,  growing  out  of  the  very  nature 
of  his  high  calling.  To  see  how  he  conceived  this 
inner  necessity  for  his  death  we  must  proceed  to  his 
subsequent  teaching  on  the  subject. 

2)  Another  of  the  great  words  on  the  death  of 
Christ  has  been  preserved  in  Mark  10 :  45.  '^  For 
the  Son  of  man  also  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto, 
but  to  minister,  and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for 
many "  ( Sovvai  rtfv  ipvxvy  avrov  Xvrpov  avtt 
TtoXXc^v).  The  saying  is  not  found  in  Luke;  and, 
when  we  consider  its  similarity  to  the  Pauline  teach- 
ing on  the  death  of  Christ,  this  is  rather  surprising; 
yet  there  is  no  sufficient  reason  to  question  its  being  a 
genuine  saying  of  Jesus. 

In  the  interpretation  of  this  passage,  there  are 
two  words  which  claim  special  attention.  They  are 
the  noun,  Xvrpov,  translated  "  ransom " ;  and  the 
preposition,  am,  translated  "  for." 

!N'ow,  the  noun,  Xvrpov,  is  found  nowhere  else  in 
the  !N"ew  Testament,  though  its  cognate  verb,  Xvrpo- 
ojxai,  to  redeem,  to  liberate  on  the  payment  of  a 
ransom,  is  found  in  Luke  24:21;  Titus  2:14; 
1  Peter  1:18;  and  as  one  of  the  components  of  the 
word,  «7roAur/0(i?(5'zS'^ redemption,  it  is  found  in  a  num- 
ber of  passages,  notably  in  Romans  3 :  24.  It  de- 
notes the  ransom  price  paid  for  a  slave ;  so  that  our 
versions  have  given  us  the  proper  translation,  when 
they  have  rendered  the  word  by  ^^  ransom." 


^04        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

With  reference  to  the  preposition,  arrz,  this  should 
be  noted.  It  is  found  nowhere  else  in  the  Kew  Testa- 
ment in  a  similar  connection  with  the  death  of  Christ. 
It  is  often  used  to  denote  an  exchange  of  some  kind, 
and  means  ^'  for/'  ''  instead  of,"  ''  in  place  of,''  and 
so  suggests  the  idea  of  substitution.  Paul  uniformly 
uses  a  different  preposition  to  express  the  relation  of 
Christ's  death  to  the  sinner.  He  uses  either  vnkf) 
or  nepiy  prepositions,  which  at  least  do  not  primarily 
suggest  the  idea  of  substitution,  but  that  of  interest. 
Where  they  are  used  the  idea  is  that  Christ  died  in 
our  behalf,  for  our  sake,  rather  than  in  our  stead. 

What  then  can  be  the  meaning  of  the  expression 
^*  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many  \  "  There  can 
scarcely  be  a  doubt  but  that  it  conveys  the  idea  in 
some  form  that  Jesus  gave  his  life  as  a  ransom  price 
to  redeem  us  from  a  state  of  bondage.  Neither  can 
there  be  much  doubt  as  to  what  this  state  of  bondage 
is.  It  is  the  bondage  to  sin  and  death,  in  which 
we  were  all  held.  To  redeem  us  from  that  state 
of  bondage  it  cost  him  his  life.  That  was  the  price 
which  he  had  to  pay;  and  short  of  that  price  our 
deliverance  could  not  have  been  obtained.  That,  too, 
seems  reasonably  certain.  But  it  is  to  be  observed 
that  is  as  far  as  the  expression  goes.  At  best  the 
expression  is  metaphorical ;  and,  as  is  true  of  meta- 
phors generally,  we  can  not  ^'  make  it  go  on  all 
fours."  And  just  that  is  the  difficulty  with  so  many 
of  the  theories  of  the  atonement.  Men  have  tried  to 
define  what  Jesus  has  left  undefined.     They  have 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM        205 

tried  to  define  the  person  to  "whom,  or  the  object  to 
which  the  ransom  price  was  paid.  For  a  thousand 
years  the  answer  was  that  it  was  paid  to  the  devil. 
Then,  after  Anselm,  the  theory  was  that  it  was  paid 
to  the  honour  of  God.  Later  men  thought  that  it 
was  paid  to  the  justice  of  God.  None  of  these  the- 
ories finds  any  support  in  this  teaching  of  Jesus, 
except  as  they  make  the  metaphor,  which  Jesus  used, 
bear  a  load  which  he  himself  did  not  put  on  it.  All 
that  he  says  is  that  death  is  the  price  which  he  paid 
to  redeem  us  from  sin  and  death ;  and  to  that  we  can 
safely  hold,  no  matter  how  far  our  theories  of  the 
atonement  may  fall  short  of  a  perfect  explanation. 

The  passage  should  manifestly  be  studied  in  con- 
nection with  its  context.  Jesus  had  just  spoken  the 
third  distinct  prediction  of  his  death.  He  and  the 
disciples  were  in  the  way,  going  up  from  Jericho  to 
Jerusalem.  The  time  was  just  before  his  last  Pass- 
over. In  spite  of  his  repeated  teaching  on  his  ap- 
proaching sufferings  and  death,  his  disciples  con- 
tinued to  misunderstand  him.  James  and  John,  sup- 
posing that  he  was  about  to  set  up  his  kingdom,  had 
just  made  their  ambitious  request  that  they  might  sit, 
the  one  on  his  right  hand,  and  the  other  on  his  left, 
in  his  kingdom.  The  rest  were  filled  with  indigna- 
tion when  they  heard  it.  And  then  Jesus  gave  them 
that  great  lesson  on  what  constitutes  greatness  in  his 
kingdom.  '^  Ye  know  that  they  which  are  accounted 
to  rule  over  the  Gentiles  lord  it  over  them ;  and  their 
great  ones  exercise  authority  over  them.     But  it  is 


206        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

not  so  among  you :  but  whosoever  would  become  great 
among  you,  shall  be  your  minister;  and  whosoever 
would  be  first  among  you,  shall  be  servant  of  all.  For 
the  Son  of  man  also  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto, 
but  to  minister,  and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for 
many"  (Mk.  10:42-45).  That  is,  his  death  was 
part  of  that  self-sacrificing  ministry  which  he  came 
into  the  world  to  render  to  us  men.  And  that  min- 
istry consisted  in  seeking  and  saving  that  which  was 
lost  (Lk.  19:10).  Inasmuch,  however,  as  that  was 
the  great  mission  which  had  been  given  him  by  the 
Father,  his  death  must  have  been  part  of  the  task 
which  God  had  assigned  him;  so  that  the  necessity 
for  his  death  was  something  deeper  than  simply  that 
growing  out  of  his  relation  to  the  unbelieving  hier- 
archy. His  death,  therefore,  has  a  significance  also 
beyond  mere  martyrdom. 

3)  There  is  another  saying,  in  which  Jesus  indi- 
cates his  conception  of  the  significance  of  his  death. 
According  to  the  form  of  the  logion  in  Matthew,  he 
connects  it  with  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  When  he 
instituted  the  Lord's  Supper,  in  taking  the  cup  he 
said,  "  Drink  ye  all  of  it ;  for  this  is  my  blood  of 
the  covenant,  which  is  shed  for  many  unto  remission 
of  sins"  (Mt.  26:27,  28). 

ISTow,  it  is  true  that  these  words,  like  all  the  others 
connected  with  the  institution  of  the  Supper,  have 
been  the  subject  of  much  controversy.  Matthew  is 
the  only  one  who  has  the  words  ^'  unto  remission  of 
sins."     Mark  says,  ^'  This  is  my  blood  of  the  cove- 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM        207 

nant,  which  is  shed  for  many ''  (Mk.  14 :  24)  ;  and 
Luke's  statement  is  very  similar,  "  This  cup  is  the 
new  covenant  in  my  blood,  even  that  which  is  poured 
out  for  you  "  (Lk.  22  :  20).  Paul  reports  the  words 
in  this  form,  "  This  cup  is  the  new  covenant  in  m}^ 
blood"  (1  Cor.  11:25).  And  because  the  words, 
"  unto  remission  of  sins,"  are  thus  omitted  in  all  the 
other  sources,  it  has  been  argued  that  they  are  not 
a  part  of  what  Jesus  originally  said,  but  an  inter- 
pretative gloss  added  by  the  first  Evangelist. 

Several  things,  however,  should  be  noted.  Accord- 
ing to  all  four  of  the  witnesses  the  blood  is  connected 
with  the  idea  of  the  covenant.  Luke  says  "  the  new 
covenant " ;  but  the  best  manuscript  authorities  omit 
"  new  " ;  and  it  is  probable  that  we  ought  to  read  the 
passage  without  the  adjective.  But  the  idea  is  not 
thereby  altered.  The  covenant  contemplated  can  be 
none  other  than  a  new  covenant,  distinct  from  the 
old  which  was  made  with  Moses.  It  was  to  be  a 
covenant  inaugurating  the  new  time,  in  which  the 
kingdom  should  be  established  among  men.  It  can 
not  well  be  conceived  as  any  other  than  that  new 
covenant,  spoken  of  by  Jeremiah.  "  But  this  is  the 
covenant  that  I  will  make  with  the  house  of  Israel 
after  those  days,  saith  Jehovah:  I  will  put  my  law 
in  their  inward  parts,  and  in  their  hearts  will  I 
write  it ;  and  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they  shall  be 
my  people"  (Jer.  31:33).  And  just  as  the  first 
covenant  was  inaugurated  by  the  blood  of  the  sacri- 
ficial victim,  so  was  it  to  be  with  the  second.     But 


208        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

here  Jesus  was  himself  the  victim,  and  his  blood  was 
that  through  which  the  covenant  was  constituted. 

But  what  was  the  purpose  which  the  blood  sub- 
served in  the  institution  of  the  first  covenant  ?  The 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  connects  it  with  cleansing. 
"  For  if  the  blood  of  goats  and  bulls,  and  the  ashes 
of  a  heifer  sprinkling  them  that  have  been  defiled, 
sanctify  unto  the  cleansing  of  the  flesh:  how  much 
more  shall  the  blood  of  Christ,  who  through  the 
eternal  Spirit  offered  himself  without  blemish  unto 
God,  cleanse  your  conscience  from  dead  works " 
(Heb.  9: 13,  14).  And  that  is  but  in  harmony  with 
the  whole  tenor  of  the  Old  Testament.  Blood  w^as 
the  means  by  which  atonement  was  made.  ^'And 
Aaron  shall  make  atonement  upon  the  horns  of  it 
(i.e.,  the  altar)  once  in  the  year;  with  the  blood 
of  the  sin-offering  of  atonement  once  in  the  year  shall 
be  make  atonement  for  it  throughout  your  genera- 
tions "  (Ex.  30:10).  So  that  even  if  we  should 
admit  that  the  words  ^'  unto  remission  of  sins  "  are 
an  interpretative  gloss  of  the  first  Evangelist,  we 
should  still  have  to  contend  that  it  is  a  correct  inter- 
pretation. Just  as  ^^  new ''  in  the  statement  con- 
tained in  Luke  is  a  correct  interpretation  of  the  kind 
of  covenant  which  is  intended,  so  is  this  addition  in 
Matthew  a  correct  statement  of  the  purpose  of  the 
shedding  of  the  blood. 

We  hence  get  a  twofold  result.  Jesus  conceived 
of  his  death  as  the  inauguration  of  the  new  covenant, 
the  ushering  in  of  the  kingdom;  and  he  thought  of 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM        ^09 

it  as  a  means  by  which  forgiveness  of  sins  was  ob- 
tained for  the  many.  How  his  death  was  to  accom- 
plish these  results,  he  does  not  undertake  to  tell. 
He  is  content  to  point  out  the  fact;  the  explanation 
he  leaves  to  the  church  to  think  out  for  herself 
under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  the 
facts  are  writ  large,  and  deserve  our  most  careful 
consideration,  even  though  the  church  has  hitherto 
failed  to  formulate  an  altogether  satisfactory  theory 
as  to  the  connection  between  his  death  and  the  for- 
giveness of  sins. 

5.    Establishing  the  Church 

Did  Jesus  also  found  a  church?  Evidently  the 
church,  as  the  historical  embodiment  of  that  ideal 
society,  in  which  the  rule  of  God  in  the  hearts  of  men 
was  to  be  realized,  was  a  necessity ;  and  in  the  course 
of  history,  it  was  organized  immediately  after  the 
day  of  Pentecost.  Did  Jesus  himself  lay  its  founda- 
tions ?  And  was  it  in  accordance  with  his  purpose 
that  the  kingdom  should  be  realized  through  such  an 
outward  embodiment  ? 

It  is  a  singular  fact  that,  although  Jesus  constantly 
speaks  of  the  kingdom,  he  speaks  of  the  church  only 
twice.  As  we  pointed  out  before,  the  kingdom  is 
the  one  great  theme  of  all  his  teaching  in  the 
Synoptic  Gospels.  There  are  only  two  passages  in 
which  the  word  church  occurs ;  and  those  are  singu- 
larly enough  found  only  in  Matthew.     Because  of 


210         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

these  facts,  some  have  doubted  whether  Jesus  him- 
self ever  actually  used  the  word,  or  whether  he  had 
any  thought  of  founding  a  church.  We  shall  hence 
have  to  examine  the  passages  themselves,  and  raise 
the  question  as  to  the  probable  source  or  sources  from 
which  the  author  of  the  First  Gospel  derived  them. 
The  first  passage  is  found  in  Matthew  16 :  18,  19. 
"  And  I  also  say  unto  thee,  that  thou  art  Peter,  and 
upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church;  and  the 
gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it.  I  will  give 
unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven:  and 
whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound 
in  heaven:  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth 
shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  Where  does  it  come 
from  ?  Mark  does  not  have  it ;  and  hence  we  can  not 
trace  it  back  through  him  to  the  preaching  of  Peter. 
Luke  does  not  have  it;  and  hence  some  have  con- 
cluded that  it  can  not  have  belonged  to  Q,  the  second 
of  the  common  sources  back  of  the  Eirst  and  Third 
Gospels.  If  the  theory,  on  which  Harnack  proceeds 
in  his  reconstruction  of  the  Q  source,  is  correct, 
namely,  that  only  so  much  of  the  discourse  material 
as  is  found  in  both  Matthew  and  Luke  can  be  at- 
tributed to  it,  then  those  who  have  taken  this  posi- 
tion are  no  doubt  right.  But  that  theory  has  been 
challenged,  and  we  believe  with  good  reason.  If 
Mark  had  been  lost,  as  was  the  document  in  which 
that  Q  source  was  embodied,  and  Q  had  been  pre- 
served, we  should  make  a  sorry  mess  of  it,  if  we 
attempted  to  reconstruct  his  Gospel  from  the  common 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM       211 

narrative  material  which  has  been  preserved  in  Mat- 
thew and  Luke.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  we  know  that 
the  two  evangelists  did  not  both  embody  the  whole 
of  Mark ;  and  why  should  we  suppose  that  they  have 
both  embodied  the  whole  of  Q  ?  It  is  much  more 
reasonable  to  suppose  that,  as  in  the  case  of  Mark. 
they  have  each  preserved  some  of  the  material  of 
that  source  which  the  other  does  not  have;  that  the 
theory  of  Archdeacon  Allen,  which  he  has  consistently 
carried  out  in  his  Commentary  on  Matthew,  is  cor- 
rect ;  and  that  this  passage  is  also  from  the  Q  source, 
or  as  he  prefers  to  say,  from  the  Logia  of  Matthew. 
Or  if  there  should  be  a  valid  objection  to  that  view, 
why  may  not  the  author  of  the  First  Gospel  be 
credited  with  having  a  special  source  here,  as  he 
certainly  had  at  some  other  places?  Such  a  view  is 
surely  more  reasonable  than  to  assume  that  he  has 
invented  the  saying  for  dogmatic  or  ecclesiastical 
purposes.  And  the  words  can  certainly  not  be  ex- 
cluded on  any  textual  ground.  There  are  no  impor- 
tant manuscript  authorities  which  omit  the  passage ; 
and  there  is  no  escape  from  the  conclusion  that  it 
formed  a  part  of  the  First  Gospel  as  originally 
written. 

But  granting  that  the  passage  represents  a  gen- 
uine saying  of  Jesus,  what  does  it  mean?  Is  the 
word  church  to  be  understood  in  its  later  ecclesi- 
astical sense,  as  an  outward  institution  with  a  visible 
organization,  and  with  certain  divinely  established 
offices?     Or  are  we  to  think  of  it  primarily  as  an 


212        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

invisible,  spiritual  entity,  working  itself  out  through 
a  brotherhood  to  an  ideal  society?  That  Jesus  did 
not  have  the  former  in  mind  seems  evident  from  what 
he  says  about  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
He  committed  to  the  disciples  themselves  the  power 
to  bind  and  to  loose ;  and  that,  according  to  the  cur- 
rent conception  of  the  Jews,  meant  authority  to 
permit  and  to  forbid.  What  they  should  permit  in 
the  way  of  outward  organization,  that  should  have 
validity;  and  what  they  should  in  like  manner  for- 
bid, that  should  be  invalid.  But  he  himself  took 
steps  to  gather  together  the  spiritual  brotherhood,  in 
which  that  life  of  love,  which  is  the  informing  and 
inspiring  principle  of  the  ideal  society,  is  gradually 
finding  its  realization.  \Yithout  such  a  brotherhood, 
his  kingdom  on  earth  is  simply  unthinkable;  and  in 
this  sense  certainly  we  must  hold  that  Jesus  both 
intended  to  establish  a  church,  and  that  he  actually 
did  establish  it.  His  entire  ministry,  especially  his 
calling  and  training  of  the  Twelve,  were  in  a  most 
real  sense  the  founding  of  the  church. 

A  question  as  to  the  manner  in  which  he  built  his 
church  still  remains.  Peter  had  just  made  his  great 
confession.  Jesus  had  just  said,  "  Blessed  art  thou, 
Simon  Bar- Jonah:  for  flesh  and  blood  has  not  re- 
vealed it  unto  thee,  but  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven. 
And  I  say  also  unto  thee,  that  thou  art  Peter,  and 
upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church  ''  (Mt.  16  :  17, 
18).     ^Yhat  is  meant  by  ''this  rock''? 

The  Roman  Church  has  answered  that  it  means 


FOUNDING  OF  THE  KINGDOM       213 

Peter,  and  that  lie  was  thereby  constituted  tlie  of- 
ficial head  of  the  church.  Protestants  have  denied 
the  interpretation,  and  they  have  made  the  rock  to 
mean  the  faith  which  he  had  just  confessed.  It  is 
probable  that  neither  interpretation  is  entirely  cor- 
rect, and  that  we  must  combine  the  two  to  get  the 
real  meaning  of  Jesus.  The  church  is  built  up  of 
living  stones ;  and,  as  its  walls  consist  of  living  per- 
sonalities, so  we  must  say  of  the  foundation.  Jesus 
did  not*  build  his  church  on  abstract  principles,  but 
on  living  personalities.  Hence  the  rock  denotes 
Peter,  but  not  Peter  simply  as  an  individual,  but 
as  the  embodiment  of  the  faith  which  he  had  just 
confessed.  As  soon  as  he  allowed  that  faith  to  become 
dimmed  by  the  assertion  of  his  self-will  as  over 
against  the  will  of  Christ,  Jesus  said  to  him,  "  Get 
thee  behind  me,  Satan :  thou  art  a  stumbling-block  to 
me :  for  thou  mindest  not  the  things  of  God,  but  the 
things  of  men"  (Mt.  16:23).  But  as  the  living 
embodiment  of  the  faith  which  he  had  just  con- 
fessed, and  just  so  far  as  he  was  a  living  embodiment 
of  that  faith,  he  was  the  rock  on  which  Jesus  built 
his  church.  But  the  same  distinction  belonged  also 
to  all  the  rest  in  that  company.  It  is  probable  that 
Peter  simply  acted  as  the  spokesman  for  the  rest; 
and  if  so,  the  rest  must  be  included  in  the  blessing 
which  Jesus  pronounced  on  him.  Or  if  Peter  was  in 
advance  of  the  rest,  he  had  a  preeminence  over  them 
only  in  so  far  as  his  faith  had  attained  a  clearer 
insight  than  theirs.     As  soon  as  they  came  to  share 


214         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

his  faith,  they  shared  his  blessedness  and  his  dis- 
tinction. 

As  to  the  other  passage  in  which  the  word  church 
occurs  (Mt.  18: 15-17),  not  much  needs  to  be  said. 
It  likewise  means  the  spiritual  brotherhood,  in  which 
the  life  of  love  is  being  realized.  It  contains  direc- 
tions how  an  erring  brother  may  be  reclaimed. 
"  And  if  thy  brother  sin  against  thee,  go,  show  him 
his  fault  between  thee  and  him  alone."  It  is  what 
the  spirit  of  love  dictates.  "  If  he  hear  thee,  thou 
hast  gained  thy  brother."  He  is  restored  to  the  fel- 
lowship of  the  brotherhood.  "  But  if  he  hear  thee 
not,  take  with  thee  one  or  two  more,  that  at  the 
mouth  of  two  witnesses  or  three  every  word  may  be 
established."  By  implication  it  is,  of  course,  to  be 
added,  if  he  hear  them  thou  hast  gained  thy  brother. 
The  purpose  of  the  admonition  is  to  win  the  brother 
from  his  evil  ways.  "  And  if  he  refuse  to  hear  them, 
tell  it  to  the  church:  and  if  he  refuse  to  hear  the 
church  also,  let  him  be  unto  thee  as  the  Gentile  and 
the  publican."  If  in  all  these  kind  and  loving  ad- 
monitions, he  refuse  to  forsake  his  sin,  you  are  to 
let  him  go  his  way,  as  you  do  a  Gentile  or  a  publican. 
But  notice,  not  a  word  is  said  about  ecclesiastical 
censures  or  excommunication.  Those  came  in  later 
through  the  church's  power  to  bind  and  to  loose; 
but  Jesus  says  nothing  about  them.  The  church 
for  him  is  the  brotherhood;  and  her  function  is  to 
exercise  that  loving  ministry  by  which  the  reign  of 
God  is  to  be  established  in  the  hearts  of  men. 


IX 

THE  citize:n's  of  the  KmaDOM 

EVERY  kingdom  must  have  a  king.     So  must 
every  kingdom  have  subjects  or  citizens.     In 
the  kingdom  of  heaven,  the  Lord  is  King. 
Who  are  the  citizens  ? 

In  accordance  with  our  definition  of  the  king- 
dom, the  citizens  are  those  who  are  under  the  divine 
rule,  who  are  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  blessings  which 
that  rule  brings,  and  who  belong  to  that  spiritual 
commonwealth  which  is  constituted  by  the  common 
possessions  which  the  enjoyment  of  those  blessings 
implies.  Has  Jesus  more  definitely  described  those 
of  whom  these  things  may  be  affirmed  ? 

The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  the  Magna  Charta 
of  the  kingdom;  and,  while  the  word  citizen  does 
not  occur  in  it,  it  describes,  as  is  done  nowhere  else, 
who  and  what  those  are  who  have  been  admitted  to 
the  privileges  and  blessings  of  the  kingdom.  By 
noting  what  is  said  of  the  character  of  those  of  whom 
these  things  are  said,  we  may  ascertain  who  belongs 
to  the  kingdom,  and  who  may  hence  be  described  as 
the  citizens  of  the  kingdom. 

215 


216        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

1.    That  Which  Constitutes  the  Citizen  Is  Character 

In  the  Sermon  on  tlie  Mount,  Jesus  unfolds  the 
nature  and  the  laws  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  In 
doing  so,  he  begins  with  a  description  of  the  char- 
acter of  its  citizens.  This  is  really  the  significance 
of  the  beatitudes.  As  Bishop  Charles  Gore  puts  it, 
^'  They  (i.e.,  the  beatitudes)  are  a  description  of 
the  character  of  the  citizen  of  the  kingdom;  that  is, 
the  character  of  the  man  who,  enjoying  the  freedom 
of  the  kingdom  of  God,  has  entered  into  the  inherit- 
ance of  true  blessedness.  Observe,  we  have  a  de- 
scription of  a  certain  character,  not  of  certain  acts. 
Christ  requires  us,  not  to  do  such  and  such  things, 
but  to  be  such  and  such  people.''  ^ 

It  is  at  this  point  that  the  teaching  of  Jesus  differs 
very  widely  from  the  conceptions  which  prevailed  in 
his  day.  According  to  the  Jewish  conception,  that 
which  conferred  upon  a  man  the  right  of  citizenship 
in  the  kingdom  of  God  was  the  accident  of  birth. 
Descent  from  Abraham  was,  according  to  them,  the 
characteristic  thing  in  a  member  of  the  Jewish  com- 
monwealth. In  exceptional  cases,  the  acceptance  of 
a  creed  and  the  observance  of  a  rite  might  confer 
the  same  prerogative.  But  no  one  ever  thought  of 
character  as  the  sole  condition  on  which  a  man  might 
be  admitted  to  the  rights  of  Jewish  citizenship ;  and 
no  one  ever  thought  of  making  the  lack  of  a  suitable 
character  the  reason  for  exclusion  from  it.    The  same 

*  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  p.  15. 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM         217 

tiling  held  true  of  the  Roman  world.  A  man  might 
have  the  right  of  citizenship,  because  he  was  born  a 
freeman;  he  might  have  the  right  conferred  upon 
him  because  of  distinguished  services  to  the  empire; 
or  it  might  be  purchased  by  a  sum  of  money  (Acts 
22:  28).  Mere  character,  except  in  the  case  of  dis- 
tinguished services  to  the  empire,  counted  for  very 
little.  The  veriest  wretch  might  be  a  citizen;  nor 
would  the  foulest  crimes  necessarily  deprive  a  man 
of  his  citizenship.  'Not  so  with  the  kingdom  which 
Jesus  came  to  establish.  Here  for  the  first  time  in 
the  history  of  mankind  character  was  made  the  essen- 
tial thing.  Birth  counts  only  in  so  far  as  a  child, 
born  of  godly  parents,  has  a  good  heredity  and  tho 
guaranty  of  a  careful  training  in  the  formation  of  a 
worthy  character.  Before  the  blessings,  which  belong 
to  that  heredity,  can  really  count  to  make  one  a  citi- 
zen of  the  kingdom,  they  must  be  freely  accepted  and 
appropriated  by  the  individual  himself.  And  in 
order  that  one  may  continue  to  live  in  the  enjoyment 
of  the  rights  and  privileges  of  this  citizenship,  he 
must  maintain  that  godly  character.  So  on  the  other 
side.  Only  the  sullying  of  that  character  can  abridge 
the  rights  which  that  citizenship  confers;  and  only 
the  utter  loss  of  it  can  exclude  any  one  from  the  king- 
dom. 

2.    What  This  Character  Is 

In  describing  the  character  of  the  citizen  of  the 
kingdom,  Jesus  enumerates  certain  qualities  which 


218        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

enter  into  its  composition.  We  do  not  have  here 
seven  different  characters,  to  be  sought  in  so  many 
different  persons,  but  seven  different  characteristic 
qualities  which  go  to  make  up  the  one  character  of 
the  citizen.  Just  as  the  different  colours  of  the  solar 
spectrum  are  not  so  many  different  rays  of  the  sun, 
but  only  the  different  constituents  of  the  one  white 
light,  so  are  these  seven  qualities  simply  the  constitu- 
ents of  the  one  Christian  character. 

Jesus  begins  his  description  by  saying,  ^'  Blessed 
are  the  poor  in  spirit."  In  Luke  the  statement  is, 
^'  Blessed  are  ye  poor,"  with  special  reference  to  the 
actual  condition  of  the  disciples  at  the  time.  But 
not  all  who  are  poor  in  this  world's  goods  are  blessed, 
neither  is  such  poverty  a  necessary  passport  into  the 
kingdom.  The  greed  and  the  rapacity  of  the  rich 
may  be,  and  often  are,  found  in  conjunction  with 
actual  poA^erty.  What  Jesus  had  reference  to  is  a 
quality  of  spirit,  and  not  simply  an  outward  condi- 
tion ;  and  hence  the  form  of  the  beatitude  in  Matthew 
must  be  taken  as  the  interpretation  of  what  is  meant 
in  Luke.  It  is  poverty  of  spirit  that  counts ;  and  by 
that  is  primarily  meant  inward  detachment  from  the 
world  and  the  things  of  the  world.  A  man  may 
possess  riches  in  such  a  way  as  if  he  had  them  not. 
That  is,  he  holds  them  as  a  trust  from  God;  and 
he  uses  them  for  God  and  for  his  fellow-men.  He 
does  not  allow  his  life  to  become  entangled  by  them 
in  such  a  way  as  to  become  dependent  on  them  for 
his  true  happiness.     He  has  so  consecrated  them  to 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM         219 

God  that  he  is  able  at  any  time  to  give  them  up, 
if  God  so  wills.  And  with  this  detachment  from 
outward  possessions  goes  an  inward  quality  of  spirit, 
which  recognizes  that  a  man  is  not  sufficient  unto 
himself,  but  is  dependent  for  his  true  welfare  on  the 
grace  of  God.  It  is  the  opposite  of  that  self- 
sufficiency,  which  so  often  accompanies  the  posses- 
sion of  wealth,  and  which  leads  a  man  to  imagine 
that  he  can  rely  on  his  own  strength.  It  leads  him 
to  recognize  that  he  has  needs  which  neither  he  nor 
the  world  can  supply,  that  of  himself  he  is  nothing. 

When  a  man  comes  to  realize  this,  he  naturally 
mourns  over  his  condition.  Hence  the  second  beati- 
tude follows :  "  Blessed  are  they  that  mourn."  Ordi- 
narily we  associate  mourning  with  sorrow,  and  we  do 
not  think  of  making  it  a  condition  for  true  happi- 
ness. Yet  when  it  springs  out  of  a  recognition  of 
our  real  condition,  of  our  own  insufficiency,  and 
when  it  brings  with  it  a  sense  of  the  fact  that  so 
much  of  our  insufficiency  is  due  to  our  unworthiness 
and  sin,  it  becomes  a  necessary  condition  for  the 
realization  of  the  kingdom  in  our  hearts.  Immersed 
in  sin,  as  we  are,  and  laden  with  guilt,  w^e  need  first 
of  all  forgiveness;  and  only  when  our  sin  is  taken 
out  of  the  way  can  we  begin  to  live  under  God's  rule. 
And  the  first  prerequisite  to  forgiveness  is  that  we 
should  learn  to  know  and  to  repent  of  our  sins.  But 
no  one  ever  repents  who  does  not  mourn  over  his  sins. 

Poverty  of  spirit  and  mourning  for  sin  lead  to 
meekness.     This  is  the  opposite  of  that  spirit,  so 


220        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

constantly  found  in  men  of  the  self-sufficient  type, 
which  is  ever  ready  to  stand  up  for  one's  own,  for 
one's  rights  and  possessions.  It  is  the  quality  of 
spirit  which  leads  a  man  to  suffer  wrong  without 
bitterness  or  the  desire  for  revenge.  It  recognizes 
the  wrongs  and  inequalities,  which  seem  to  be  in- 
separable from  this  present  life;  it  bears  the  result- 
ing injustices  patiently  and  submissively;  and  it 
looks  to  God  for  the  rectification  of  the  ills  which 
now  exist. 

'Next  follows  hungering  and  thirsting  after  right- 
eousness. When  one  recognizes  his  true  condition, 
when  one  truly  mourns  his  unworthiness  and  his 
spiritual  destitution,  and  when  one  realizes  the  actual 
condition  of  the  world  in  which  he  lives  so  as  to 
bear  his  share  of  the  ills  inseparable  from  the  present 
state  without  murmuring,  he  soon  begins  to  long  for 
a  higher  and  better  state  both  for  his  inner  life  and 
for  the  world  in  which  he  lives.  He  hungers  and 
thirsts  after  righteousness,  as  a  weary  traveller  in  the 
desert  hungers  and  thirsts  after  the  good  things  of 
the  fertile  land.  Luke  here  again  reports  Jesus  as 
saying,  "  Blessed  are  ye  that  hunger  now,"  referring 
to  the  actual  condition  of  the  disciples,  to  their  out- 
ward destitution;  and  when  hunger  and  thirst  are 
endured  for  the  sake  of  enabling  one  to  do  his  part 
in  righting  the  ills  of  life,  there  is  glory  and  blessed- 
ness in  it.  But  again  the  blessedness  of  such  a  con- 
dition depends  on  the  cause  which  has  produced  the 
want.     Want  which  is  the  result  of  sin  or  wasteful- 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM         221 

ness  is  not  blessed,  nor  is  it  a  mark  of  a  true  char- 
acter. The  quality  referred  to  again  is  one  of  the 
spirit — an  inner  longing,  which  amounts  to  an 
actual  hunger  and  thirst  after  a  state  of  right- 
eousness, in  which  the  ills  of  the  present  shall  be 
righted. 

The  man  in  whom  are  found  the  above  character- 
istics will  be  merciful.  He  will  pity  the  unfortunate 
and  the  sinful;  but  his  feeling  with  reference  to 
them  will  not  exhaust  itself  in  sentimental  com- 
miseration. It  will  stir  him  on  to  action,  to  bring 
relief  to  the  suffering.  The  man  who  realizes  his 
weakness  and  shortcoming,  who  really  mourns  over 
his  own  deficiency,  who  bears  the  ills  and  the  inequal- 
ities of  life  without  murmuring  or  the  desire  for 
revenge,  and  who  is  sincerely  in  earnest  in  his  desire 
for  a  better  state  of  things,  will  not  harshly  condemn 
others  in  their  shortcomings.  He  will  be  merciful 
in  his  dealings  with  them.  Wherever  possible,  he 
will  labour  to  turn  men  from  their  sins ;  and  he  will 
be  slow  to  condemn  and  ready  to  forgive.  In  all 
cases  he  will  strive  to  mitigate  the  penalties  and  the 
sufferings  which  his  fellow-men  bring  upon  them- 
selves by  their  sins. 

And  all  this  will  have  a  most  powerful  influence 
upon  his  own  life.  It  will  have  a  tendency  to  cleanse 
the  springs  of  action,  so  that  his  heart  will  become 
clean;  and  by  the  heart  here  we  mean,  not  simply 
the  feelings  and  the  affections,  but  the  whole  inner 
man.     He  will  by  and  by  become  a  man  of  pure 


9.%%        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

heart.  And  that,  as  used  bj  Jesus  in  this  Sermon 
on  the  Mount,  means  much  more  than  we  usually 
make  it  mean.  Generally  when  men  speak  of  purity 
of  heart  they  mean  absence  of  lustful  desire,  espe- 
cially sexual  desire.  That  is  doubtless  included; 
but  it  is  by  no  means  all  of  it.  It  means  rather  that 
the  whole  inner  man  becomes  so  attuned  to  the  will  of 
God  that  evil  desires  of  all  kinds  are  banished.  The 
heart,  as  denoting  the  inner  man,  our  inmost  and 
deepest  part,  is  the  spring  of  our  actions,  the  prolific 
source  out  of  which  come  thoughts,  feelings,  and 
volitions.  By  nature  it  is  evil,  so  that  only  those 
things  enumerated  in  Mark  7 :  20-23,  evil  thoughts, 
fornications,  thefts,  murders,  adulteries,  covetings, 
deceit,  lasciviousness,  an  evil  eye,  railing,  pride,  fool- 
ishness, come  out  of  it.  But  when  the  heart  is  pure, 
this  entire  spring  of  action  is  cleansed,  so  that  none 
of  these  evil  things  continue  to  have  their  lodging 
place  there. 

And  finally  such  men  become  peacemakers.  Men 
are  at  enmity  with  each  other  and  with  God,  because 
they  are  sinful  and  evil.  Because  men  are  so  much 
attached  to  the  things  of  the  world,  because  they 
are  so  self-sufiicient,  because  they  are  ever  ready  to 
stand  up  for  their  rights,  because  they  are  so  largely 
satisfied  with  the  world  as  it  is,  because  they  have  so 
little  mercy  for  each  other  in  their  weaknesses  and 
sins,  and  because  in  their  hearts  they  are  ever  hatch- 
ing out  schemes  of  plunder  and  evil,  the  world  is 
topsy-turvy,  and  men  are  continually  at  war  with 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM 

eacli  other.  And  only  the  man  who  has  begun  to 
realize  the  opposite  of  all  this  in  himself,  can  begin 
to  exercise  an  influence  which  makes  for  peace.  He 
can  attain  to  that  blessed  state  in  his  own  life  only 
when  he  has  made  his  peace  with  God;  but  having 
made  peace  with  God,  he  is  in  a  position  where  he 
can  lead  others  to  God,  and  help  men  to  become 
reconciled  to  each  other. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  these  qualities,  which 
Jesus  describes,  hang  together.  There  is  a  wonder- 
ful logical  connection  between  them.  One  naturally 
grows  out  of  the  other.  Together  they  form  that 
perfect  character,  which  the  citizen  of  the  kingdom 
must  acquire. 

3.    Entering  the  Kingdom 

And  all  this  now  leads  us  to  inquire,  how  such  a 
character  may  be  acquired,  ^o  man  is  bom  with  it, 
just  as  no  man  is  by  nature  born  into  the  kingdom. 
We  may  ascertain  how  such  a  character  is  formed,  if 
we  note  what  Jesus  has  to  say  about  entering  the 
kingdom  of  God. 

According  to  Mark,  Jesus  began  his  ministry  with 
the  proclamation  of  the  presence  of  the  kingdom  of 
God;  and  he  made  that  the  ground  for  the  twofold 
challenge,  "  Eepent  ye,  and  believe  in  the  gospel " 
(Mk.  1:15).  This  challenge  presents  the  twofold 
condition  on  which  alone  it  was  possible  for  the  king- 
dom to  find  a  place  in  the  hearts  of  men.     Repent- 


224         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

ance  and  faith  were  hence  from  the  very  beginning 
made  the  conditions  for  entering  the  kingdom. 

1)  What  did  Jesus  mean  by  repentance?  The 
Greek  word,  jLterayoia,  implies  a  change  of  mind. 
One  only  needs  to  recall  our  Lord's  teaching  on  the 
actual  condition  of  man  in  order  to  realize  what  sort 
of  a  change  is  intended.  As  we  saw,  Jesus  looked 
upon  man  as  sinful  and  evil.  He  is  in  a  depraved 
and  lost  condition.  This  depravity  has  extended  to 
his  entire  being,  so  that  there  is  no  part  of  it  free 
from  the  taint.  The  taint,  moreover,  has  extended 
to  all  men,  so  that  all,  even  the  holiest  of  us,  have 
need  constantly  to  pray,  ^'  Forgive  us  our  debts.'' 
And  the  depravity  is  of  such  a  kind  that  the  very 
heart  of  man,  his  inmost  and  deepest  self,  has  be- 
come polluted.  Only  evil  thoughts,  fornications, 
thefts,  murders,  adulteries,  etc.,  come  out  of  it,  so 
long  as  man  is  in  his  natural  condition.  His  whole 
mind  is  wrong.  It  has  found  its  chief  desire,  its 
highest  good,  in  the  things  of  this  world;  and  hence 
it  is  at  enmity  with  God.  'Now,  when  Jesus  called 
upon  men  to  repent,  he  did  not  mean  merely  that 
they  should  experience  a  certain  sentimental  sorrow 
for  their  sins;  he  meant  that  they  should  change 
their  minds  with  reference  to  the  one  great  end  of 
life,  that  they  should  undergo  such  an  inward  change 
as  to  find  their  chief  and  their  highest  good,  no 
longer  in  the  world  and  the  things  of  the  world,  but 
in  God  and  in  his  kingdom. 

This  interpretation  is  supported  by  the  word  which 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM 

Jesus  used  in  another  connection  to  denote  the  same 
idea.  When  they  were  in  the  way,  returning  from 
Csesarea  Philippi,  the  disciples  had  disputed  about 
who  should  be  greatest  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
(Mk.  9  :  33-37) .  After  they  had  entered  Capernaum, 
Jesus  asked  them  about  their  dispute;  and  he  made 
it  the  text  for  a  much-needed  lesson.  He  took  a 
little  child,  and  set  him  in  the  midst;  and,  accord- 
ing to  Matthew,  he  said,  ^^  Verily  I  say  unto  you, 
Except  ye  turn,  and  become  as  little  children,  ye 
shall  in  no  wise  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  " 
(Mt.  18 :  3).  The  Greek  for  turn  is  arpaq)rire,  and 
it  is  properly  translated  '^  turn,"  as  in  the  Revised 
Version,  and  not  ^'  be  converted,"  as  in  the  Author- 
ized Version.  It  implies  a  turning  from  one  state 
to  another.  Where  the  natural  mind  is  fixed  on 
the  world,  it  must  turn  and  become  fixed  on  God. 
In  the  case  immediately  under  discussion,  the  dis- 
ciples were  moved  by  worldly  ambition.  They 
thought  the  kingdom  of  God  was  about  to  be  ushered 
in.  They  had  just  confessed  Jesus  as  the  Messiah; 
and,  although  he  had  taken  occasion  immediately  to 
warn  them  against  a  wrong  conception,  they  had 
continued  to  think  only  of  an  earthly  kingdom. 
They  were  making  their  calculations  as  to  the  posi- 
tions which  they  were  to  occupy.  Their  minds  were 
filled  with  the  thought  of  earthly  glory  and  worldly 
good.  Hence  Jesus  told  them  that,  unless  they 
turned  from  that  sort  of  ambition  and  became  with 
reference  to  all  that  which  thev  had  in  their  minds 


226        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

as  a  little  child,  they  could  not  so  much  as  enter  the 
kingdom. 

Very  much  the  same  thought  is  presented  in  the 
teaching  of  Matthew  6 :  19-34.  Jesus  is  there  urging 
the  necessity  of  trust  in  our  heavenly  Father.  He 
tells  the  disciples  not  to  lay  up  for  themselves  treas- 
ures upon  earth.  Their  chief  concern  should  not 
be  food  and  raiment,  and  the  things  of  this  present 
life.  They  should  seek  first  the  kingdom  of  God 
and  his  righteousness.  And  then,  after  presenting 
this  teaching  in  the  most  beautiful  comparisons, 
Jesus  goes  on  to  point  out  the  difference  between  the 
Christian  and  the  pagan,  between  the  citizen  of  the 
kingdom  and  the  citizen  of  this  world.  "For  after 
all  these  things  (i.e.,  food  and  raiment,  and  the 
things  of  the  present  life)  do  the  Gentiles  seek;  for 
your  heavenly  Father  knoweth  that  ye  have  need  of 
all  these  things.  But  seek  ye  first  his  kingdom  and 
his  righteousness ;  and  all  these  things  shall  be  added 
unto  you"  (Mt.  6:32,  33).  As  the  Jew  was  wont 
to  divide  the  whole  human  race  into  two  classes,  the 
children  of  Abraham  and  the  rest  of  mankind,  whom 
he  called  Gentiles ;  so  does  Jesus  here  divide  the  race 
into  two  classes,  disciples  or  Christians  and  Gentiles 
or  pagans.  IN'ow  the  difference  between  the  two  is 
that  the  latter  has  made  the  world  and  the  things  of 
the  world  his  chief  end ;  while  the  former  has  set  his 
heart  on  the  kingdom  of  God  and  his  righteousness. 
The  pagan  lives  for  the  world  and  the  things  of  the 
world;  the  true  Christian  lives  for  God  and  for  his 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM         227 

kingdom.  Now,  before  the  pagan,  whether  he  be 
found  in  Christian  or  in  heathen  lands,  can  become 
a  true  Christian,  a  genuine  citizen  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  he  must  change  his  mind ;  he  must  turn  about 
in  the  inmost  centre  of  his  being;  he  must  learn  to 
place  the  kingdom  of  God  into  the  place  of  chief  end 
for  his  entire  existence. 

2)  With  repentance  Jesus  joins  faith.  ^'  Repent 
and  believe  in  the  gospel."  The  two  are  inseparably 
conjoined.  The  latter  is  the  positive  condition,  with- 
out which  the  former  is  impossible. 

We  have  said  that  repentance  is  the  turning  from 
sin  to  holiness  and  righteousness;  it  is  the  changing 
of  one's  mind  with  reference  to  the  true  aim  and  end 
of  life;  it  implies  the  putting  of  the  kingdom  of 
God,  instead  of  the  world,  into  the  first  place  in  our 
affections.  But  before  this  can  be  done,  we  must 
learn  to  recognize  God  and  his  kingdom  as  the  high- 
est good.  A  man  always  puts  that  which  appeals  to 
him  as  the  highest  good  into  the  first  place  in  his 
affections.  For  that  he  lives  and  strives.  If  he  lives 
for  the  world  and  for  the  things  of  the  world,  it  is 
because  in  his  eyes  these  things  are  really  of  greater 
value  for  his  true  life  than  anything  else ;  and  before 
he  can  be  persuaded  to  put  into  their  place  the  king- 
dom of  God  and  his  righteousness,  he  must  be  en- 
abled to  see  that  these  are  really  a  higher  good  than 
those.  In  other  words,  a  man  always  lives  for  that 
in  which  he  believes.  If  he  believes  in  the  world, 
as  that  which  is  able  to  satisfy  his  needs  and  desires, 


228        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

he  will  make  that  his  chief  end,  and  he  will  live 
for  it.  If  on  the  other  hand  he  believes  in  God 
and  his  kingdom,  as  that  which  is  able  to  satisfy  his 
deepest  need  and  to  fulfil  his  most  ardent  longings, 
he  will  make  them  the  chief  end  of  his  being  and  he 
will  live  for  them. 

An  illustration  of  this  truth  we  find  in  the  case 
of  the  rich  young  ruler,  who  came  running  to  Jesus, 
saying,  "  Good  Master,  what  shall  I  do  that  I  may 
inherit  eternal  life''  (Mk.  10:17).  With  marvel- 
lous insight  Jesus  laid  his  finger  on  the  one  thing 
that  was  lacking.  The  young  man  was  religious 
and  moral,  as  he  understood  religion  and  morality; 
but  he  had  never  learned  what  demands  true  reli- 
gion really  makes.  He  was  rich,  and  he  believed  in 
his  riches  as  a  very  real  good.  In  fact,  when  it  came 
to  the  test,  it  was  found  that  in  his  eyes  his  wealth 
was  of  greater  value  than  the  kingdom  of  God. 
Hence  when  Jesus  told  him  to  go  and  sell  all  that 
he  had  and  give  to  the  poor,  he  w^as  offended  and 
went  away  deeply  wounded.  What  he  really  lacked 
was  the  insight  of  faith  to  recognize  God  and  his 
kingdom  as  the  highest  good.  W^ith  all  his  apparent 
zeal  for  eternal  life,  he,  deep  down  in  his  heart,  be- 
lieved the  transitory  things  of  this  present  life  to 
be  a  greater  good  than  the  imperishable  things  of 
heaven.  His  failure  was  a  failure  first  of  all  of 
faith;  and  hence  he  failed  to  repent,  to  turn,  to  be 
converted. 

It  is  thus  apparent  how  faith  is  the  positive  side 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM         229 

of  the  process  by  wliieli  a  man  gains  entrance  into 
the  kingdom ;  and  also  how  repentance,  which  is  the 
negative  side,  naturally  grows  out  of  it.  Eaith  is  the 
motive  power  which  leads  a  man  to  turn  from  sin 
and  the  world  to  God.  As  such  two  other  things 
are  implied. 

a)  If  faith  recognizes  God  as  the  highest  good, 
it  begets  perfect  trust  in  him.  He  is  spirit  and  he  is 
invisible.  The  things  which  we  need  for  this  life 
are  largely  material  and  visible ;  and  because  they  are 
thus  visible  and  tangible,  we  are  in  danger  of  im- 
agining that  we  must  make  them  our  chief  care. 
They  seem  to  be  nearest  to  us  and  most  necessary. 
JSTow,  before  we  can  give  ourselves,  with  a  whole- 
hearted consecration,  to  the  invisible  and  the  eternal, 
we  must  learn  to  trust  God  for  that  which  we  put 
into  the  secondary  place.  And  just  that  is  the  lesson 
which  Jesus  teaches.  ^'  Therefore  I  say  unto  you, 
Be  not  anxious  for  your  life,  what  ye  shall  eat,  or 
what  ye  shall  drink ;  nor  yet  for  your  body,  what  ye 
shall  put  on.  Is  not  the  life  more  than  the  food,  and 
the  body  than  the  raiment?  Behold  the  birds  of 
the  heaven,  that  they  sow  not,  neither  do  they  reap, 
nor  gather  into  barns;  and  your  heavenly  Father 
feedeth  them.  Are  ye  not  of  much  more  value  than 
they?"  (Mt.  6:25,  26). 

h)  Above  we  noted  that  the  kingdom  is  a  gift 
as  well  as  a  task, — in  fact,  a  gift  before  it  can  be- 
come a  task.  The  will  of  God,  as  our  highest  good, 
must  enter  our  wills,  as  an  informing  power,  before 


^30        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

we  can  obey  it.  The  kingdom  of  God,  as  a  world 
of  supernatural  and  heavenly  powers,  must  first  of 
all  descend  and  lay  hold  of  our  lives,  before  we  can 
lay  hold  of  it  as  a  good  to  be  appropriated.  And 
the  power  which  thus  lays  hold  of  it,  or  rather  the 
power  which  opens  thus  to  receive  this  heavenly  gift, 
is  faith.  It  not  simply  recognizes  the  kingdom  as 
our  highest  good ;  but  in  as  far  as  it  is  a  good  which 
must  be  received  and  appropriated  by  us,  faith  is  the 
faculty  by  which  we  receive  it. 

4.    True  Blessedness 

Jesus  begins  his  description  of  the  character  of  the 
citizen  of  the  kingdom  by  calling  attention  to  the 
blessedness  of  the  man  who  is  in  possession  of  it. 
He  assumes  what  every  Jew  had  taken  for  granted, 
and  what  all  of  us  now  take  for  granted,  namely, 
that  the  life  of  the  kingdom  is  blessed,  or,  as  we 
would  likely  say,  happy.  But  it  is  to  be  noted,  Jesus 
does  not  make  happiness  the  chief  end  of  the  king- 
dom, nor  the  chief  end  for  which  a  man  ought  to 
live.  That,  as  we  just  saw,  is  righteousness  (Mt. 
6:  33).  But  he  takes  it  for  granted  that,  when  any 
one  has  attained  to  the  chief  end  of  his  existence, 
when  he  has  attained  the  righteousness  of  the  king- 
dom, he  will  be  happy. 

Another  fact  should  be  noted.  Jesus'  idea  of 
blessedness  differs  from  that  which  was  held  by  the 
Jews.     They  made  happiness  to  consist  in  a  man's 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM         231 

circumstances,  in  his  position,  his  influence,  his  pos- 
sessions. Jesus  makes  happiness  dependent  on  char- 
acter. ISTot  what  a  man  has,  but  what  he  is,  deter- 
mines his  blessedness. 

Now,  just  as  Jesus  analyzed  the  character  of  the 
citizen  of  the  kingdom  into  its  constituent  elements, 
so  he  gives  in  connection  with  each  of  them  the  pe- 
culiar kind  of  bliss  which  it  brings. 

The  poor  in  spirit  are  blessed;  "for  theirs  is  the 
kingdom  of  heaven."  Heaven  is  where  God  is ;  and 
God  is  everywhere.  "  Closer  is  he  than  breathing, 
and  nearer  than  hands  and  feet."  Like  the  air  we 
breathe,  he  is  round  and  about  us  everywhere,  above, 
beneath,  around ;  and  just  as  the  air  enters  the  lung 
when  there  is  nothing  there  to  obstruct  it,  so  does 
he  enter  the  heart,  when  emptied  of  sin  and  the  world. 
"With  the  self-emptying  which  always  comes  with 
true  poverty  of  spirit,  there  comes  that  divine  infill- 
ing which  brings  the  kingdom  of  heaven  with  it. 

They  that  mourn  are  blessed ;  "  for  they  shall  be 
comforted."  They  mourn  their  imperfect  and  sinful 
condition;  but  that  is  the  very  attitude  of  heart 
needed  for  forgiveness.  And  with  forgiveness  there 
comes  a  new  status  in  which  the  individual  is  clothed 
upon  with  a  righteousness  which  is  from  God.  And 
however  imperfectly  he  may  realize  all  that  is  in- 
volved in  that  blessed  state,  he  can  even  now  realize 
enough  of  it  to  have  a  foretaste  of  its  joy. 

The  meek  are  blessed ;  "  for  they  shall  inherit  the 
earth."    A  seeming  contradiction,  one  is  apt  to  ex- 


2S2        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

claim.  The  meek  endure  wrong  patiently,  he  does 
not  forever  stand  up  for  his  rights  but  suffers  injus- 
tice,— the  very  way  to  lose  all  of  the  world  that  one 
may  seem  to  possess.  Yet  Jesus  says,  the  meek  shall 
inherit  the  earth.  How  ?  The  man  who  elbows  his 
way  to  the  front,  who  refuses  to  bear  his  share  of 
the  inequalities  of  life,  and  who  always  looks  out 
for  '^  number  one,"  may  seem  to  succeed  for  a  time. 
He  may  even  seem  to  be  climbing  up  towards  the  top. 
But  such  a  man  always  elbows  his  way  into  much 
that  is  not  strictly  his  own;  and  in  the  long  run, 
he  is  compelled  to  take  a  lower  room.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  man  who  meekly  takes  the  place  which 
God  in  his  providence  gives  him  will  by  and  by 
hear  the  welcome  call,  "  Friend,  Go  up  higher.'^ 

The  man  who  hungers  and  thirsts  after  righteous- 
ness will  be  filled.  And  the  reason  is  not  hard  to 
find.  His  earnest  longing  is  an  indication  that  in- 
wardly he  is  already  in  harmony  with  the  will  of 
God.  Outwardly  he  may  fall  far  short  of  what  he 
ought  to  be;  but  inwardly  he  is  in  accord  with  the 
will  of  God;  and  that  is  the  best  guaranty  that  he 
will  be  so  finally  in  his  outward  life. 

The  exercise  of  mercy  also  brings  the  blessedness 
of  mercy.  Mercy  is  twice  blessed;  it  blesses  him 
that  gives,  and  him  that  takes;  only  he  who  gives 
receives  the  richer  blessing.  The  exercise  of  mercy 
on  his  part  only  shows  that  God's  love  has  already 
found  lodgment  in  his  heart;  and  as  that  love  is  as 
infinite  as  God  himself,  it  bestows  richer  gifts  the 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM         233 

more  tlie  heart  becomes  attuned  to  its  sweet  influ- 
ence. 

The  pure  in  heart  shall  see  God.  He  attains  to 
the  beatific  vision.  Only  that  eye  can  see  light 
which  has  the  capacity  of  responding  to  the  solar 
ray.  All  eyes  which  have  not  that  capacity  are 
blind.  So  of  our  spiritual  vision.  That  we  may 
see  the  truth,  and  so  ultimately  see  God,  we  must 
have  within  us  the  capacity  of  responding  to  the 
truth.  We  must  have  within  ourselves  that  which 
is  like  God;  and  because  God  is  pure,  w^e  must  be 
pure  in  the  very  inmost  depths  of  our  being  if  we 
would  see  him.  And  this  vision  of  God  is  the  bea- 
tific vision,  the  supreme  blessedness.  Our  happiness 
now  is  always  bound  up  with  the  enjojonent  of  some 
form  of  the  true,  the  beautiful,  or  the  good.  But 
the  true,  the  beautiful,  and  the  good  are  only  the 
forms  in  which  God  manifests  himself.  He  is  the 
absolute  truth;  he  is  the  altogether  beautiful;  he  is 
the  supreme  good.  Hence  when  we  shall  see  him 
face  to  face,  we  shall  see  the  true,  the  beautiful, 
and  the  good,  in  the  highest,  the  absolute  form, 
shining  upon  us  in  a  single  unbroken  ray.  And 
when  once  we  are  strong  enough  and  pure  enough  to 
have  that  vision,  we  shall  have  attained  unto  the  per- 
fection of  blessedness. 

The  peacemakers  are  blessed;  "for  they  shall  be 
called  the  children  of  God."  Being  like  God  in  the 
purity  of  their  hearts,  reproducing  in  their  lives  the 
righteousness,  mercy,  and  peace  of  God,  they  become 


234<        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

partakers  of  his  very  nature.  They  become  children 
of  God,  because  they  now  begin  to  realize  the  high 
ideal  of  their  lives,  responding  to  his  love  and  fulfill- 
ing his  will. 

5.    The  Citizen  of  the  Kingdom  in  Relation  to  the 
World 

What  now,  it  may  next  be  asked,  is  the  relation 
of  the  citizen  of  the  kingdom  to  the  world  ?  Is  not 
the  character  here  portrayed  too  ideal  to  be  of  any 
practical  value  in  a  world  like  this  ?  In  reply  to  this 
question,  Bishop  Gore  has  finely  said,  ^'  ISTow  our 
Lord  at  once  anticipates  this  kind  of  argument.  He 
says  at  once,  as  it  were,  No,  you  are  to  help  men  by 
being  unlike  them.  You  are  to  help  men,  not  by 
offering  them  a  character  which  they  shall  feel  to 
be  a  little  more  respectable  than  their  own,  but  by 
offering  them  a  character  filled  with  the  love  of  God. 
They  may  mock  it  for  a  while;  but  in  the  ^  day  of 
visitation,'  in  the  day  when  trouble  comes,  in  the 
day  when  they  are  thro^vn  back  on  what  lies  back 
of  respectability,  in  the  day  when  first  principles 
emerge,  they  will  glorify  God  for  the  example  you 
have  given  them.  They  will  turn  to  you  then,  be- 
cause they  will  feel  that  you  have  something  to  show 
them  that  will  really  hold  water,  something  that  is 
really  and  eternally  worth  having."  ^ 

To  point  out  the  place  which  the  man,  with  the 

*  Op.  cit.,  p.  45. 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM         235 

character  above  described,  holds  in  the  world,  Jesus 
uses  two  metaphors.  "  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth." 
^'Ye  are  the  light  of  the  world"  (Mt.  5:13,  14). 
The  world,  as  such,  is  corrupt,  and  is  sinking  into 
decay.  As  salt  has  the  property  of  preserving  food, 
so  has  the  Christian  character  the  quality  of  keeping 
the  world  from  corruption.  And  the  way  in  which  it 
accomplishes  this  great  end  is  by  ever  holding  up 
before  it  a  higher  and  purer  ideal.  The  genuine 
Christian  has  caught  a  vision  of  God,  of  his  right- 
eousness and  truth.  By  it  he  has  received  an  inner 
illumination  by  which  he  is  enabled  to  see  things  in 
the  right  relation.  He  has  learned  to  know  what  is 
the  highest  good,  and  with  it  he  has  learned  to  put 
first  things  first.  And  that  is  what  gives  him  his 
abiding  influence.  Where  all  others  seem  to  be 
plunged  into  the  darkness  of  eternal  night,  he  stands 
as  a  living  witness  to  that  which  is  higher  and  better. 
Both  the  metaphors  under  consideration  imply  that, 
as  the  citizen  of  the  kingdom  has  been  blessed,  so 
he  is  to  become  a  blessing.  God  has  blessed  him,  not 
primarily  as  a  favourite,  but  as  a  servant,  to  diffuse 
his  light  among  all  with  whom  he  is  associated. 
Hence  the  exhortation  follows,  "  Even  so  let  your 
light  shine  before  men,  that  they  may  see  your  good 
works,  and  glorify  your  Father  who  is  in  heaven  " 
(Mt.  5  :  16).  The  Jews,  under  the  old  economy,  had 
also  been  blessed ;  but  their  misery  was  that  they 
fancied  themselves  to  be  the  favourites  of  Jehovah, 
and  so  tried  to  keep  the  blessings  to  themselves.    As 


THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

with  Abraham,  God  had  blessed  them  that  they 
might  be  a  blessing  (Gen.  12 :  2,  3)  ;  and  the  same 
holds  true  of  the  Christian.  ^'  A  city  that  is  set  on 
a  hill  cannot  be  hid.  Neither  do  men  light  a  lamp, 
and  put  it  under  a  bushel,  but  on  the  stand;  and  it 
shineth  unto  all  that  are  in  the  house  "  (Mt.  6 :  14, 
15).  It  is  the  property  of  light  to  shine;  and  the 
only  way  its  rays  can  be  extinguished  is  by  extin- 
guishing the  light  itself.  So  the  Christian  character 
can  remain  Christian  only  where  it  shows  itself  in 
good  works,  and  where  it  stands  as  a  perpetual  wit- 
ness to  the  light  and  truth  of  God. 

Hence  the  citizen  of  the  kingdom  stands  in  the 
world  as  the  medium  through  which  the  light  and 
the  truth  of  the  revelation  of  Jesus  are  to  be  propa- 
gated. Hence  also  the  last  word  which  Jesus  is 
reported  to  have  spoken  to  the  disciples.  ^'  All  au- 
thority hath  been  given  to  me  in  heaven  and  on 
earth.  Go  ye  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all 
nations,  baptizing  them  into  the  name  of  the  Father 
and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost :  teaching  them 
to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded 
you:  and  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world  "  (Mt.  28  :  18-20).  Whatever  may 
be  said  on  critical  grounds  with  reference  to  the  gen- 
uineness of  that  statement,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  it  expresses  the  mind  of  Jesus  with  reference 
to  the  relation  of  the  disciple  to  the  world.  He  is 
its  preserver ;  he  is  its  light  and  its  guide ;  and  if  he 
fails  to  exercise  his  high  commission,  there  is  no 


CITIZENS  OF  THE  KINGDOM         237 

other  way  by  which  corruption  may  be  warded  off. 
"  If  the  salt  have  lost  its  savour,  wherewith  shall  it 
be  salted  ?  it  is  thenceforth  good  for  nothing,  but  to 
be  cast  out  and  trodden  under  the  foot  of  men '' 
(Mt.  6:13).  It  can  neither  renew  itself,  nor 
can  it  be  renewed  by  any  power  outside  of  itself. 
So  with  the  Christian  character.  If  once  it  is  lost 
it  can  not  be  regained.  It  can  neither  recover  itself, 
nor  can  it  save  the  world. 

To  accomplish  this  high  and  holy  mission,  the 
citizen  of  the  kingdom  must  have  a  spiritual  and 
heavenly  mind.  He  must  not  be  worldly  minded. 
On  this  Jesus  insisted  again  and  again.  '^  Lay  not 
up  for  yourselves  treasures  upon  earth,  where  moth 
and  rust  doth  consume,  and  where  thieves  break 
through  and  steal:  but  lay  up  for  yourselves  treas- 
ures in  heaven,  where  neither  moth  nor  rust  doth 
consume,  and  where  thieves  do  not  break  through 
and  steal :  for  where  your  treasure  is  there  will  your 
heart  be  also"  (Mt.  6:19-21).  To  lay  up  treas- 
ures in  heaven  means  to  be  engaged  in  the  pursuit 
of  the  things  which  pertain  to  the  kingdom.  To  be 
engaged  in  the  pursuit  of  the  things  that  belong  to 
this  world  is  to  lay  up  treasures  upon  earth;  and 
that,  as  we  saw  above,  is  characteristic  of  the  pagan 
spirit.  IS^either  is  it  possible  to  divide  one's  time 
and  affections  between  the  things  of  the  kingdom  and 
the  things  of  the  world ;  for  "  no  man  can  serve 
two  masters."  ^'  Ye  can  not  serve  God  and  mam- 
mon"  (Mt.  6:  24).     The  eye  must  be  single,  if  the 


238        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

body  is  to  be  full  of  light.  So  the  life  must  be  char- 
acterized by  a  whole-hearted  devotion  to  the  king- 
dom, if  it  is  to  be  indeed  a  light  in  the  midst  of  a 
dark  and  benighted  world. 

Does  this  now  mean  that  the  citizen  of  the  king- 
dom must  renounce  all  riches  and  embrace  a  volun- 
tary poverty?  A  hasty  reading  of  the  story  of  the 
rich  young  man  might  lead  to  such  a  conclusion. 
Jesus  told  him  to  go  and  sell  all  that  he  had  and 
give  it  to  the  poor,  and  then  to  come  and  follow  him 
(Mk.  10 :  21).  But  alongside  of  that  must  be  placed 
the  story  of  Zacchseus,  who  though  he  voluntarily 
gave  half  his  goods  to  the  poor,  and  though  he  volun- 
teered to  restore  fourfold  whatsoever  he  had  taken 
from  any  one  wrongfully,  yet  is  not  told  to  part 
with  the  rest  of  his  property.  He  continued  in  the 
possession  of  a  large  part  of  his  wealth;  and  he  was 
rich.  'No;  while  Jesus  warned  against  the  dangers 
of  wealth,  he  did  not  teach  that  the  mere  possession 
of  it  is  in  itself  ruinous  to  the  Christian  character. 
According  to  a  reading,  contained  in  many  manu- 
scripts, it  is  not  the  possession  of  riches,  but  the  trust 
in  them  that  is  the  hindrance  (Mk.  10:  24).  Even 
if  that  be  a  gloss,  it  undoubtedly  is  a  correct  inter- 
pretation. Jesus  does  not  demand  actual  poverty, 
but  poverty  of  spirit — that  inward  detachment  from 
the  world  and  the  things  of  the  world,  which  enables 
one  to  possess  the  things  of  the  world  as  a  trust  from 
God.  And  such  possession  is  not  inconsistent  with 
a  spiritual  and  heavenly  mind. 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KI:NTGD0M 

IE*  the  last  chapter  we  studied  the  character  of  the 
citizen  of  the  kingdom.  We  found  it  to  be  made 
up  of  elements  and  characteristics  which  are 
totally  different  from  those  which  made  up  the  char- 
acters of  the  men  who  were  admired  by  all  in  the 
Saviour's  day.  We  quote  Bishop  Gore  once  more. 
*'  The  character  of  the  citizens  of  the  new  kingdom 
described  by  our  Lord  was  so  surprising,  so  paradox- 
ical, that  it  was  inevitable  that  the  question  should 
arise,  Was  he  a  revolutionary  who  had  come  to  upset 
and  destroy  all  the  old  law — ^was  this  a  revolutionary 
movement  in  the  moral  and  religious  world?  To 
this  question,  then,  our  Lord  directly  addressed  him- 
self. The  rest  of  the  first  chapter  of  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount — Matthew  5 :  17  to  the  end — is  simply  a 
statement  of  the  relation  in  which  the  new  righteous- 
ness, this  righteousness  of  the  new  kingdom,  stands 
to  the  old  righteousness  of  the  Mosaic  law."  ^ 

1.    The  True  Righteousness 

In  proceeding  now  to  study  Jesus'  conception  of 
righteousness,    we    note    two    things:    that   he    em- 
*  Op.  cit.,  p.  51. 

239 


240        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

phasizes  the  continuity  between  the  Mosaic  law  and 
his  own  teaching;  and  secondly,  that  he  is  equally 
emphatic  in  pointing  out  how  the  new  righteousness 
of  the  kingdom  surpasses  and  supersedes  the  right- 
eousness of  the  Old  Testament. 

1)  Jesus  says,  ^'  Think  not  that  I  am  come  to 
destroy  the  law  or  the  prophets;  I  came  not  to  de- 
stroy, but  to  fulfil.''  He  recognizes  that  both  the 
law  and  the  prophets  are  part  of  the  revelation  which 
God  made  to  his  people ;  and  that  they  hence  contain 
elements  which  are  immutable  and  divine.  ^^  For 
verily  I  say  unto  you,  Till  heaven  and  earth  pass 
away,  one  jot  or  one  tittle  shall  in  no  wise  pass  away 
from  the  law,  till  all  things  be  accomplished  "  (Mt. 
5 :  17,  18).  But  the  precepts  of  that  old  law  had  been 
given  to  an  immature  race  and  had  been  adapted  to 
its  circumstances  and  needs.  It  had  been  given  ^'  by 
divers  portions  and  in  divers  manners  "  (Heb.  1:1). 
It  was  given  in  such  portions  and  in  such  forms  as 
the  people  were  prepared  to  receive.  It  contained 
eternal  and  immutable  truths;  but  these  were  so  ex- 
pressed as  suited  the  imperfect  condition  of  the 
people.  Hence  what  was  needed  was  not  the 
destruction  of  the  law  or  the  prophets,  but  their 
fulfilment. 

We  may  well  imagine  the  wonder  with  which  even 
the  disciples  must  at  first  have  received  this  an- 
nouncement that  their  law  needed  fulfilment.  Was 
not  the  law  of  the  Lord  perfect,  as  they  had  been 
taught?  (Ps.  19  :  7).    Had  it  not  been  given  to  them 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        241 

by  God?    And  was  it  not  divine?    How  then  could 
it  need  fulfilment? 

What  is  meant  by  fulfilment  may  be  seen,  if  we 
bear  in  mind  what  was  just  said  about  the  manner 
in  which  the  law  was  given.  It  was  given  "  by 
divers  portions  and  in  divers  manners."  The  people 
were  not  prepared  to  receive  the  full-orbed  revelation 
of  God.  He  revealed  only  so  much  of  his  glory  as 
they  were  prepared  to  behold.  As  Jesus  pointed 
out  in  the  subsequent  portions  of  this  chapter,  every 
revelation  was  a  substantial  advance  on  what  the 
people  had  known  before;  but  it  was  still  partial, 
and  so  imperfect,  because  it  was  adapted  to  the  pe- 
culiar needs  of  the  people  at  the  time.  N^ow,  what 
was  needed  was  that  the  truth,  which  was  contained 
in  every  form  of  this  partial  revelation,  should  be 
conserved  in  the  new  revelation,  but  expressed  in 
such  a  form  as  to  be  suited  to  the  needs  of  all  peoples 
and  all  times.  Or  to  put  it  in  another  form.  Though 
the  truth  contained  in  every  expression  of  the  law 
was  divine  and  immutable,  it  was  given  in  the  form 
of  precepts  which  had  reference  to  particular  forms 
of  outward  activity.  The  law  was  throughout  nega- 
tive, saying,  thou  shalt  not  do  this,  thou  shalt  not  do 
that.  It  was  not  given  in  the  form  of  a  principle 
which  laid  hold  of  the  inner  life,  and  controlled  the 
conduct  from  within.  It  had  not  been  written  in  the 
heart  in  the  form  of  an  all-controlling  motive  which 
made  the  man  a  law  unto  himself.  But  just  that 
is  what  Jesus  undertook  to  do.     He  penetrated  be- 


U2        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

yond  tlie  outward  precept,  and  laid  hold  on  the  prin- 
ciple out  of  which  the  precept  had  grown.  He 
sought,  not  primarily  to  control  the  conduct  from 
without,  but  to  shape  it  from  within  by  changing 
the  impulses  of  the  heart.  And  when  that  one  all- 
comprehensive  principle,  out  of  which  all  the  nega- 
tive precepts  of  the  old  law  had  grown,  had  found 
expression,  and  when  it  had  been  written  in  the 
heart,  the  law  itself  had  reached  its  fulfilment,  and 
the  forms  in  which  it  had  found  expression  were 
ready  to  pass  away. 

2)  But  all  this  now  implies  the  idea  of  super- 
session. Excellent  and  divine  as  the  old  law  was, 
it  had  to  give  way  to  something  higher  and  better. 
This  Jesus  illustrated  by  referring  first  of  all  to  the 
typical  representatives  of  the  old  righteousness,  and 
then  by  pointing  out  the  inner  principle  which  under- 
lies its  several  precepts. 

The  old  righteousness  had  found  its  typical  repre- 
sentatives in  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  of  his  day. 
They  were  the  religious  people,  to  whom  men  gen- 
erally looked  up  as  correct  in  life  and  conduct.  They 
had  made  a  careful  study  of  the  law ;  and  they  had 
made  an  effort  to  obey  it,  as  they  understood  it. 
Yet  Jesus  said,  "  Except  your  righteousness  shall 
exceed  the  righteousness  of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees, 
ye  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  "  (Mt.  5  :  20).  The  difficulty  with  them  was 
that  they  emphasized  the  letter,  and  neglected  the 
spirit.     They  aimed  at  outward  conformity  to  pre- 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM 

cept ;  they  did  not  grasp  the  principles,  out  of  which 
the  precepts  had  grown.  Hence  while  their  conduct 
might  be  formally  correct,  their  hearts  remained  cold 
and  selfish.  Hence  also  Jesus  complained  of  them, 
"  Well  did  Isaiah  prophesy  of  you  hypocrites,  as  it 
is  written, 

"  This  people  honoureth  me  with  their  lips. 
But  their  heart  is  far  from  me. 
In  vain  do  they  worship  me, 
Teaching  as  their  doctrine  the  precepts  of  men." 

(Mk.  7:6,  7.) 

In  showing  how  the  old  righteousness  of  the  law 
has  been  superseded  by  the  new  righteousness  of 
the  kingdom,  Jesus  threw  his  teaching  into  a  con- 
crete form.  He  used  illustrations  to  set  forth  his 
meaning.  A  glance  at  each  of  these  will  enable  us 
to  grasp  his  thought. 

He  begins  with  the  law  of  murder.  The  scribes 
and  Pharisees  had  interpreted  the  law  in  such  a  way 
as  to  make  murder  to  consist  in  the  overt  act.  Jesus 
pointed  out  that  the  violation  of  the  law  really  con- 
sists in  that  disposition  of  the  heart  out  of  which  the 
act  grows.  Anger  exposes  a  man  to  judgment ;  while 
the  open  expression  of  the  angry  feeling,  whether  in 
word  or  deed,  aggravates  the  offense. 

In  the  case  of  adultery,  the  sin  consists  in  lustful 
desire,  consciously  and  wilfully  entertained.  So  long 
as  the  desire  to  commit  lewdness  is  entertained,  and 
so  long  as  the  fear  of  consequences  or  the  lack  of 
opportunity  is  the  only  thing  that  keeps  a  man  from 


244        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

committing  the  sin,  he  is  guilty.  The  principle  is 
thus  established  that  the  Lord,  who  knoweth  the 
heart  (Lk.  16:15),  judges  a  man  according  to  the 
motives  which  lie  back  of  his  actions. 

Again,  Jesus  refers  to  the  law  of  the  oath.  The 
Jews  had  insisted  on  the  sacredness  of  the  oath. 
They,  moreover,  had  a  superstitious  reverence  for 
the  divine  name.  This  led  them  to  substitute  other 
forms  of  the  oath,  instead  of  a  direct  calling  on  the 
name  of  God.  Jesus  taught  that  we  should  not  swear 
at  all.  The  oath  implies  that  there  is  a  possibility 
of  our  placing  ourselves  in  a  special  way  into  the 
presence  of  God,  and  calling  upon  him  to  witness  to 
the  truthfulness  of  what  we  say.  Jesus  teaches  that 
we  are  always  in  the  presence  of  God,  that  he  is  a 
witness  of  everything  we  say,  and  that  we  shall  have 
to  give  an  account  for  every  idle  word  (Mt.  12 :  36). 

Jesus  next  takes  up  the  law  of  retaliation.  ^'  Ye 
have  heard  that  it  was  said.  An  eye  for  an  eye,  and 
a  tooth  for  a  tooth:  but  I  say  unto  you.  Resist  not 
him  that  is  evil:  but  whosoever  smiteth  thee  on  the 
right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the  other  also.''  The  old 
law  seems  to  be  little  removed  from  barbarism;  yet 
in  its  day  it  had  been  a  great  advance  on  the  cus- 
toms which  prevailed  in  the  heathen  nations  round 
about  Israel.  Among  them  the  law  allowed  revenge 
to  the  uttermost.  The  law  of  Moses  stepped  in  as 
a  beneficent  policeman,  and  said.  Have  you  been  in- 
jured ;  has  an  eye  been  put  out,  then  you  may  exact 
an  eye  in  return ;  has  a  tooth  been  knocked  out,  then 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        245 

you  may  demand  a  tooth  in  return:  but  you  must 
stop  there.  The  penalty  which  you  inflict  must  not 
be  greater  than  the  injury  which  you  have  suffered. 
But  Jesus  teaches  a  higher  law.  The  principle  which 
should  govern  a  man's  conduct  towards  his  fellows  is, 
not  bare  justice,  but  love.  Instead  of  returning  like 
for  like,  we  should  return  good  for  evil  (Mt. 
5:38-42). 

And  this  leads  to  the  summing  up  of  his  teaching 
on  this  point.  "  Ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said, 
Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour,  and  hate  thine  enemy : 
but  I  say  unto  you.  Love  your  enemies,  and  pray  for 
them  that  persecute  you ;  that  ye  may  become  sons  of 
your  Father  who  is  in  heaven''  (Mt.  5:43,  44). 
Love  is  the  informing  principle  of  the  whole  law; 
and  a  man  is  right  in  the  sight  of  God  only  when 
he  exercises  love  as  the  Father  in  heaven  does.  This 
is  brought  out  more  fully  elsewhere,  where  Jesus 
points  out  the  sum  of  the  whole  law.  ''  Thou  shalt 
love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with 
all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind.  This  is  the 
great  and  first  commandment.  And  a  second  is  like 
unto  it.  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself. 
On  these  two  commandments  hangeth  the  whole  law 
and  the  prophets"  (Mt.  22:37-40).  And  what  he 
meant  by  the  word  neighbour  may  be  gathered  from 
the  parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan.  'Not  my  kin, 
nor  the  man  who  may  reside  next  door,  but  any 
one  to  whom  I  may  show  kindness  and  benefit  (Lk. 
10:25-37). 


246        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that,  according  to  the  concep- 
tion of  Jesus,  true  righteousness  consists  in  the  right 
disposition  of  the  heart,  not  primarily  in  any  set  of 
external  or  overt  acts.  And  by  heart  here,  it  is  well 
to  remember,  is  meant  the  inner  man, — not  simply 
one  part  of  the  inner  man  like  the  feelings  and  the 
affections,  but  the  whole  inner  man.  It  includes 
intellect,  feeling,  and  will;  it  is  the  spring  out  of 
which  come  thoughts,  feelings,  and  volitions;  and  it 
has  moral  quality  in  itself  even  before  these  things 
are  thrown  up  out  of  it  into  our  upper  consciousness. 
It  is  good  or  bad,  not  because  our  thoughts,  feelings, 
and  volitions  which  come  out  of  it  are  good  or  bad; 
but  these  receive  their  moral  quality  from  the  moral 
quality  of  the  heart  out  of  which  they  come.  Hence 
only  when  the  heart  is  right,  both  in  its  relation  to 
God  and  to  man,  does  any  one  possess  true  righteous- 
ness; and  it  is  right  when  its  controlling  motive  in 
all  things  is  love. 

And  yet,  while  all  this  is  true,  the  heart  must 
reveal  itself  in  external  conduct.  As  the  spring  of 
action,  it  must  be  continually  throwing  up  into  the 
outward  life  the  things  which  are  its  natural  product. 
There  must  hence  be  a  right  conduct,  corresponding 
to  the  right  disposition  which  exists  within.  And 
this  conduct  must  have  reference  to  the  two 
great  relations  in  which  we  stand, — our  rela- 
tions to  God  and  to  man.  The  true  righteousness 
must  hence  produce  the  true  religion  and  the  pure 
morality. 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        247 

2.    The  True  Religion 

Wliat  the  true  religion  is  Jesus  has  also  indicated 
in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  It  is  the  theme  which 
he  takes  up  immediately  after  he  is  through  with 
pointing  out  the  superiority  of  the  righteousness  of 
the  kingdom  over  that  of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees. 
"  Take  heed  that  ye  do  not  your  righteousness  before 
men,  to  be  seen  of  them:  else  ye  have  no  reward 
with  your  Father  who  is  in  heaven"  (Mt.  6:1). 
That  is,  when  you  now  come  to  give  expression  to 
this  inner  disposition  of  your  hearts,  be  careful  of 
the  motive  which  controls  your  conduct.  In  per- 
forming your  religious  acts,  see  to  it  that  the  motive 
which  prompts  you  is  love  to  God  and  not  vainglory. 

Jesus  next  illustrates  this  principle  by  giving 
three  examples.  He  takes  what  the  Jews  regarded  as 
the  three  principal  forms  of  religious  activity,  alms- 
giving, prayer,  and  fasting;  and  he  shows  what  each 
must  be,  if  it  is  to  be  acceptable  to  God. 

And  it  is  to  be  noted  that  Jesus  includes  alms- 
giving and  fasting  under  the  head  of  religion. 
Almsgiving  might  be  taken  up  as  a  form  of  morality, 
inasmuch  as  it  is  benevolence,  the  relief  of  the  poor 
and  destitute;  but  Jesus  does  not  depart  from  the 
old  Jewish  idea  that  it  is  a  part  of  true  worship. 
It  is  in  all  cases  inspired  by  the  love  of  God;  and 
in  the  last  analysis,  while  it  is  an  expression  of 
love  to  our  fellow-men,  it  is  first  of  all  an  expression 
of  our  love  to  God.     And  it  is  a  singular  fact  that 


^48        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

genuine  benevolence  begins  with  the  religion  of 
Jesus ;  and  true  charity  is  not  found  where  the  name 
of  Jesus  is  unknown.  So  with  reference  to  fasting. 
In  one  aspect  of  it,  it  is  part  of  our  self -discipline ; 
and  we  occasionally  find  it  in  men  who  will  abstain 
from  certain  things  merely  out  of  considerations  of 
health.  But  genuine  reverence  for  the  body  comes 
only  where  men  learn  to  recognize  it  as  the  temple 
of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  and  so  fasting  in  the  highest  sense 
is  a  religious  activity. 

1)  Almsgiving  may  spring  out  of  one  or  the  other 
of  two  motives.  It  may  have  its  root  in  vainglory. 
A  man  may  give  to  objects  of  benevolence  in  order 
to  win  the  applause  of  men;  many  did  so  in  our 
Lord's  day,  and  many  are  doing  so  to-day.  Jesus 
discourages  that;  and  he  plainly  teaches  that  such 
benevolence  has  no  value  in  the  sight  of  God.  It  is 
what  the  hypocrites  do,  that  is,  those  who  are  playing 
a  part  in  religion,  who  are  trying  to  appear  other 
than  they  really  are.  But  not  self-love,  but  the  love 
of  God  is  the  spring  of  all  true  benevolence.  If  God 
is  our  Father,  then  all  his  children  are  our  brethren ; 
and  our  love  to  God  must  prompt  love  to  them.  As 
is  so  forcibly  brought  out  in  the  First  Epistle  of 
John,  ^^We  love,  because  he  first  loved  us"  (1  Jn. 
4:19).  That  is,  love  has  found  a  place  in  our 
hearts,  because  our  hearts  have  first  of  all  been 
touched  by  the  finger  of  his  love.  And  that  love  is 
not  simply  our  love  to  God,  but  love  as  such ;  for  the 
true  reading  is  not,  ^^  We  love  him,  because  he  first 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        249 

loved  us,"  as  in  the  Authorized  Version ;  but  '^  We 
love,  because  he  first  loved  us/'  as  in  the  Revised 
Version.  And  that  implies  that  where  the  love  of 
God  really  has  found  a  lodgment  in  the  heart,  it  will 
show  itself  in  deeds  of  love  to  our  fellow-men.  And 
hence  John  adds,  "  If  any  man  say,  I  love  God,  and 
hateth  his  brother,  he  is  a  liar :  for  he  that  loveth  not 
his  brother  whom  he  hath  seen,  can  not  love  God 
whom  he  hath  not  seen  "  (1  Jn.  4:  20). 

And  with  this  agrees  what  Jesus  said  about  the 
relative  importance  of  offering  our  gifts  on  the  altar 
and  being  reconciled  to  a  brother.  "  If  therefore 
thou  art  offering  thy  gift  before  the  altar,  and  there 
rememberest  that  thy  brother  hath  aught  against 
thee,  leave  there  thy  gift  before  the  altar,  and  go 
thy  way,  first  be  reconciled  to  thy  brother,  and  then 
come  and  offer  thy  gift  "  (Mt.  5  :  23,  24).  Sacrifice 
as  an  expression  of  our  love  to  God  can  have  little 
or  no  value,  so  long  as  the  relation  between  us  and 
our  fellow-men  is  one  of  enmity.  Hence  reconcilia- 
tion must  be  effected  before  our  worship  can  be  ac- 
ceptable. 

2)  The  same  principle  is  next  applied  to  prayer. 
To  be  acceptable  to  God,  it  must  spring,  not  out  of 
regard  for  the  good  opinion  of  our  fellow-men,  but 
out  of  sincere  love  to  God.  It  must  be  the  genuine 
expression  of  our  heart's  desire,  and  not  a  stage  play 
to  impress  men  with  our  piety  (Mt.  6:5,  6). 
iN'either  is  it  made  more  acceptable  by  vain  repeti- 
tions.   That  was  a  heathen  fault,  just  as  ostentatious 


S50         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

display  was  a  fault  of  the  Pharisees.  It  is  just  as 
offensive;  for  it  implies  a  lack  of  faith  in  God's 
ability  and  willingness  to  hear,  just  as  the  other  im- 
plies a  lack  of  genuine  love  for  him.  To  enable  us 
to  avoid  both  errors,  Jesus  first  of  all  directs  us  to 
pray  in  secret,  in  our  inner  chambers;  and  then  he 
gives  us  the  model  prayer,  which  in  six  brief  peti- 
tions contains  all  things  necessary  for  soul  and  body. 

As  is  well  known,  Luke  gives  this  model  prayer 
in  a  slightly  different  form,  and  in  a  different  con- 
nection (Lk.  11: 1-5).  It  may  well  be  that  it  was 
given  twice ;  and  in  our  study  of  it  both  forms  should 
be  kept  in  mind. 

a)  In  this  model  prayer,  Jesus  teaches  first  of  all 
what  should  be  our  attitude  when  we  approach  the 
throne  of  grace.  ^'  After  this  manner  therefore  pray 
ye :  Our  Father  who  art  in  heaven."  It  is  the  proper 
form  of  addressing  God;  and  as  such,  it  teaches  us 
the  proper  attitude  of  prayer.  If  we  would  pray 
aright,  we  must  recognize  God  as  our  Father.  One 
who  fails  to  recognize  the  Fatherhood  of  God,  is  not 
in  a  position,  where  he  can  offer  either  a  believing 
or  an  effectual  prayer.  At  the  basis  of  all  true  wor- 
ship lies  the  filial  spirit ;  and  that  implies  confidence 
and  trust.  As  it  looks  up  into  the  Father's  face,  it 
recognizes  that  God  knows  what  we  have  need  of 
before  we  ask  him  (Mt.  6:8);  and  it  also  perceives 
that  he  is  willing  to  give  good  things  to  them  that  ask 
him  (Mt.  7:11). 

h)    The  question  has  been  asked.  Did  Jesus  in- 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        251 

tend  this  prayer  to  be  a  form  whicli  Ms  people  should 
always  and  only  use?  We  may  confidently  answer 
in  the  negative.  It  is  a  model,  indicating  the  sphere, 
within  which  our  prayers  should  move.  The  child 
in  its  prattle,  as  it  sits  on  its  father's  knee,  is  apt 
to  say  many  a  foolish  thing.  So  are  we  apt  to  say 
many  a  foolish  thing,  when  we  attempt  to  tell  our 
wants  and  wishes  to  our  heavenly  Father.  What  it 
is  proper  for  us  to  ask,  we  may  see  if  we  note 
the  petitions  which  find  a  place  in  this  model 
prayer. 

The  petitions  of  the  model  prayer  point  us  in  two 
directions.  In  the  longer  form,  given  in  Matthew, 
there  are  three  petitions  with  the  pronoun  tliy,  point- 
ing our  thoughts  upward  to  God  and  his  kingdom; 
and  there  are  three  with  the  pronoun  us,  pointing 
to  ourselves  and  to  our  needs. 

As  we  approach  the  throne  of  mercy,  our  first 
thought  should  not  be  of  ourselves.  Beholding  the 
Father's  glory,  our  thoughts  should  first  of  all  be 
engaged  with  his  holy  name,  wdth  his  glorious  king- 
dom, and  with  the  doing  of  his  holy  will.  In  the 
proportion  in  which  we  are  able  to  realize  how  much 
is  included  in  these  three  simple  petitions,  will  we 
be  able  to  realize  how  broad  a  sweep  Jesus  has  given 
to  our  prayers.  The  hallowing  of  his  name,  the 
coming  of  his  kingdom,  the  doing  of  his  will  on 
earth  as  it  is  done  in  heaven — that  includes  all  that 
men  and  nations  need  wish  or  strive  after.  It  in- 
cludes all  proper  forms  of  government  among  men, 


252         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

all  forms  of  missionary  effort,  all  forms  of  benev- 
olence in  human  society. 

After  we  have  prayed  for  that  which  pertains  to 
the  honour  and  glory  of  God,  it  is  proper  for  us  to 
turn  our  eyes  inward  upon  ourselves  and  to  think  of 
our  own  needs  and  desires.  The  natural  heart  would 
begin  there;  and  our  constant  danger  even  in  our 
prayers  is  to  dwell  on  these,  and  to  make  them  the 
sum  and  substance  of  our  petitions.  How  often,  even 
with  this  model  prayer  before  us,  we  begin  and  end 
our  petitions  with  things  that  pertain  solely  to  our 
own  welfare  !  Many  so-called  Christian  prayers  have 
their  inspiration,  not  in  the  spirit  of  adoption,  but 
in  the  spirit  of  selfishness.  The  place  for  petitions 
which  have  reference  to  our  own  needs  is  after  we 
have  prayed  for  the  glory  and  the  kingdom  of  God. 

Among  the  petitions  which  have  reference  to  our 
own  needs  there  is  one,  and  only  one,  which  touches 
our  bodily  wants.  "Give  us  this  day  our  daily 
bread."  That  is  all  of  earth  that  Jesus  teaches  the 
child  of  God  to  ask  of  the  heavenly  Father.  The 
two  petitions,  which  specially  refer  to  our  higher 
spiritual  needs,  have  reference  to  our  sinful  state. 
Perhaps  we  might  say  that  the  first  of  the  three  in- 
cludes a  petition  for  spiritual  food  as  well  as  for 
that  which  sustains  the  body;  and  if  we  adopt  that 
interpretation,  then  there  is  a  reference  to  our  higher 
spiritual  needs  in  them  all.  But  it  is  nevertheless 
an  impressive  fact  that  so  large  a  part  of  this  second 
half  of  the  prayer  is  taken  up  with  petitions  bearing 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        253 

on  our  spiritual  conflict.  Every  one  of  us  is  a  debtor ; 
and  we  have  need  to  pray  for  forgiveness  as  long  as 
we  live.  Though  trials  are  needful  for  the  develop- 
ment of  our  characters ;  yet,  inasmuch  as  every  trial 
involves  a  temptation  from  the  evil  that  is  round 
about  us  in  the  world,  we  have  need  to  pray  for 
deliverance  from  the  evil  one. 

c)  According  to  Luke,  Jesus,  at  least  on  the  oc- 
casion when  he  gave  the  prayer  the  second  time, 
added  a  lesson  on  the  proper  spirit  in  which  our 
prayers  should  be  offered.  In  the  parable  of  the 
Importunate  Widow  (Lk.  11:5-8),  he  teaches  the 
necessity  of  earnestness  and  perseverance  in  prayer. 
Often  the  heavens  seem  to  be  shut;  we  seem  to  be 
pouring  out  our  hearts'  desire  upon  the  empty  air; 
there  seems  to  be  no  one  to  hear  or  answer  our  peti- 
tions. When  that  happens,  he  encourages  us  to  per- 
severe earnestly  in  our  devotions.  God's  ways  are 
not  our  ways;  his  thoughts  are  not  our  thoughts; 
and  often  the  granting  of  our  feeble  petitions  would 
not  be  a  blessing  but  the  reverse.  Hence  God,  who 
is  good,  and  who  loves  us  more  than  we  can  love  our- 
selves, withholds  in  his  wisdom  what  we  think  we 
need,  only  however  to  give  us  what  he  sees  that  is 
really  for  our  good.  But  whenever  that  happens, 
Jesus  teaches  that  we  should  earnestly  persevere 
until  God's  will  is  plain. 

Such  perseverance  in  prayer  is  not  vain  repetition, 
such  as  Jesus  discourages ;  it  is  rather  the  imitation 
of  his  own  example.     Three  times  at  least,  we  are 


254        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

told,  lie  spent  an  entire  night  in  prayer;  and  in  the 
garden,  he  repeated  the  same  petition  three  times, 
and  with  the  greatest  earnestness.  Yet  each  time 
the  petition  was  coupled  with  the  prayer,  ''  I^ot  my 
will,  but  thine  be  done  ''  (Lk.  22 :  42)  ;  and  with  each 
repetition  of  the  prayer  the  Father's  will  became 
clearer,  until  he  was  able  to  go  forth  to  meet  the 
traitor  and  the  band  which  was  with  him. 

3)  Does  the  teaching  of  Jesus  also  put  fasting 
among  our  proper  religious  activities?  As  we  have 
already  noted,  he  does  not  break  with  the  Jewish  con- 
ceptions on  the  point.  They  had  included  it  among 
those  religious  activities  by  which  a  man  attains 
righteousness  in  the  sight  of  God;  and  Jesus  left  it 
stand.  Only  he  corrected  the  abuses  which  had 
grown  up  in  connection  with  it;  he  gave  it  a  new 
meaning ;  and  he  taught  us  both  by  precept  and  exam- 
ple how  it  may  be  made  a  legitimate  and  helpful 
activity  in  our  religious  life. 

Again  he  starts  with  the  principle  that  fasting,  if 
it  is  to  be  a  help  and  not  a  hindrance  in  our  religious 
life,  must  proceed  from  a  right  motive.  When  we 
fast,  we  should  not  seek  to  gain  notoriety  for  reli- 
gious earnestness.  It  dare  not  be  a  stage  parade  to 
impress  men  with  our  piety.  It  must  be  an  affair 
between  us  and  God  alone.  There  are  times  when  it 
is  out  of  order,  and  when  there  can  be  no  fasting. 
This  Jesus  plainly  declared,  when  the  Pharisees  came 
to  ask  him  why  his  disciples  did  not  keep  the  fasts 
which  tradition  had  ordained.     He  replied,  "  Can 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        S55 

the  sons  of  the  bridechamber  fast,  while  the  bride- 
groom is  with  them  ?  as  long  as  they  have  the  bride- 
groom with  them,  they  can  not  fast.  But  the  days 
will  come,  when  the  bridegroom  shall  be  taken  away 
from  them,  and  then  shall  they  fast "  (Mk.  2:19, 
20).  A  genuine  fast  must  have  its  occasion  in  the 
inner  life ;  it  can  not  take  place  simply  in  conformity 
with  an  external  rule.  When  it  is  the  expression  of 
genuine  sorrow;  when  it  is  prompted  by  an  all- 
absorbing  interest  in  higher  things,  like  his  own 
fasting  in  the  wilderness  (Mt.  4:2)  ;  or  when  it  is 
done  to  mortify  the  flesh  for  the  purpose  of  overcom- 
ing some  sinful  propensity  (Mt.  5:29,  30),  then  it 
is  in  order  and  may  become  a  useful  exercise  in  our 
spiritual  life.  In  each  case,  however,  it  grows  out 
of  a  genuine  desire  to  realize  God's  will ;  and  thus  it 
becomes  an  expression  of  our  love  to  God. 

Jesus  had  no  sympathy  with  asceticism,  such  as 
was  practised  by  certain  Jewish  sects  in  his  day,  and 
such  as  has  been  practised  by  many  Christians  since 
then.  That  assumed  that  there  is  virtue  in  the  mor- 
tification of  the  body  as  such,  as  if  God  delighted 
in  self-inflicted  pain.  Jesus'  own  example  teaches 
that  a  whole  life  is  better  than  any  form  of  mutilated 
life.  The  best  life  is  that  in  which  the  individual 
is  in  the  healthy  exercise  of  all  his  powers.  But 
when  any  one  is  in  danger  of  wrecking  his  true  life 
through  the  temptations  which  arise  from  the  exer- 
cise of  any  one  of  its  functions,  Jesus  teaches  that 
it  is  better  to  undergo  any  kind  of  self-limitation 


256        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

rather  than  run  the  risk  of  making  shipwreck  of  the 
entire  life  through  sin.  '^  And  if  thj  right  eye 
causeth  thee  to  stumble,  pluck  it  out,  and  cast  it 
from  thee:  for  it  is  profitable  for  thee  that  one  of 
thy  members  should  perish,  and  not  that  thy  whole 
body  should  be  cast  into  hell.  And  if  thy  right  hand 
causeth  thee  to  stumble,  cut  it  off,  and  cast  it  from 
thee :  for  it  is  profitable  for  thee  that  one  of  thy  mem- 
bers should  perish,  and  not  thy  whole  body  go  into 
hell ''  (Mt.  5  :  29,  30).  That  is,  better  undergo  any 
form  of  self-denial  than  fall  into  sin.  But  it  is  to 
be  noted  that  self-denial,  if  it  is  to  be  profitable, 
must  not  be  for  the  sake  of  the  self-denial,  as  if  that 
were  a  good  in  itself;  its  motive  must  be  found  in 
our  conflict  with  sin.  So  with  fasting.  If  it  is  to 
be  a  proper  part  of  the  activities  of  a  righteous  life, 
it  must  have  its  motive  in  something  beyond  itself, 
in  helping  to  make  us  more  fit  for  the  full  realization 
of  God's  will  in  us. 

True  fasting  thus  aims  at  helping  us  gain  self- 
control.  It  is  not  simply  nor  primarily  abstinence 
from  food  or  pleasure.  It  is  equivalent  to  self-denial ; 
and  it  should  be  a  free  activity  of  our  religious  life. 
So  long  as  we  are  what  we  are,  denizens  in  the  flesh, 
there  is  constant  danger  that  sin,  taking  advantage 
of  our  weakness,  may  lead  us  astray.  Hence  when 
temptation  comes,  it  is  well  for  us  to  deny  ourselves 
in  that  out  of  which  the  temptation  arises.  By  so 
doing  we  are  strengthened  in  the  inner  man,  and  thus 
become  more  able  to  do  our  heavenly  Father's  will. 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        257 

For  this  reason,  however,  fasting  to  be  profitable 
must  be  the  free  activity  of  our  inner,  religious  life. 
It  can  not  be  determined  by  times  and  seasons,  as 
so  much  of  our  outward  religious  custom  tries  to  do. 
It  must  grow  out  of  the  necessities  of  our  inner  life ; 
and  it  cannot  conform  to  outward  rule  without  de- 
generating and  losing  its  vitality  and  power. 

3.    The  Pure  Morality 

True  righteousness  must  also  include  pure  moral- 
ity. That  inner  attitude  of  the  heart,  which  puts  a 
man  into  right  relation  to  God,  must  also  place  him 
into  right  relation  to  his  fellow-men.  It  must  de- 
termine his  conduct  with  reference  to  others  as  indi- 
viduals, with  reference  to  the  family,  and  with  refer- 
ence to  the  state.  On  each  of  these  relations  Jesus 
has  left  us  illuminating  instruction. 

1)  With  reference  to  a  man's  relations  to  his 
fellow-men  as  individuals,  we  need  to  study  first  of 
all  what  Jesus  has  denominated  the  second  command- 
ment. The  principle  in  it  is  the  same  as  that  of 
the  first,  namely,  love;  but  the  measure  of  its  exer- 
cise is  different.  The  first  commandment  requires 
supreme  love  to  God — ^love  with  all  our  soul,  mind, 
and  strength.  God  brooks  no  rival  in  our  hearts. 
Either  we  must  give  him  all,  or  he  will  accept  noth- 
ing. In  our  relation  to  our  fellow-men,  the  case  is 
different.  There  the  measure  is  the  love  of  oneself. 
"  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself "   (Mt. 


258        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

22:39).  That  implies  that  there  is  a  love  of  self 
which  is  legitimate  and  proper.  Self-love  becomes 
selfishness  only  where  this  second  commandment  is 
violated,  and  where  a  man  loves  himself  more  than 
he  does  his  neighbour.  And  just  what  is  involved 
in  such  love  for  our  neighbour,  Jesus  has  stated  in 
another  place.  "  All  things  therefore  whatsoever  ye 
would  that  men  should  do  unto  you,  even  so  do  ye 
also  unto  them  "  (Mt.  7 :  12).  It  has  been  called  the 
golden  rule ;  and  its  meaning  can  not  easily  be  mis- 
taken. If  ever  perplexity  arises  as  to  what  the  love 
of  God  requires  us  to  do  for  our  neighbour,  we  can 
resolve  it  by  this  rule.  Put  yourself  into  your  neigh- 
bour's place,  and  then  ask  yourself  what  you  would 
have  him  do  to  you,  and  you  will  readily  see  what 
you  ought  to  do  to  him.  Of  course,  this  does  not 
mean  that,  if  you  were  in  his  place,  you  would  wish 
him  to  do  wrong  for  your  sake,  and  that  hence  you 
must  do  wrong  for  him.  Jesus  assumes  that  you  are 
a  child  of  God,  that  you  are  governed  by  a  sincere 
desire  to  do  his  will,  and  that  you  would  not  wish 
your  neighbour  to  do  anything  contrary  to  God's  will 
for  you  any  more  than  you  would  be  willing  to  do 
that  for  yourself. 

There  are  two  things  implied  in  the  exercise  of 
this  law  of  love,  on  which  Jesus  lays  special  em- 
phasis. On  the  one  side,  it  requires  us  to  resist  the 
temptation  to  censoriousness ;  on  the  other  it  should 
prompt  us  to  forgive  our  enemies. 

With  reference  to  the  former  Jesus  doubtless  had 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        259 

the  Pharisees  in  mind  in  what  he  said.  Imagining 
themselves  better  than  others,  they  continually  sat 
in  judgment  on  them;  and  the  character  of  their 
judgments  may  be  seen  when  we  recall  that  they 
accounted  the  common  people  accursed.  Jesus  said, 
"  Judge  not,  that  ye  be  not  judged.  For  with  what 
judgment  ye  judge,  ye  shall  be  judged :  and  with  what 
measure  ye  mete,  it  shall  be  measured  to  you  again '' 
(Mt.  7:1,  2).  But  does  that  mean  that  God  will 
deal  mercifully  with  us,  because  we  deal  mercifully 
with  our  fellow-men  ?  ^N'o ;  the  ground  of  his  mercy 
is  always  found  in  his  infinite  love,  which  is  as  deep 
and  as  broad  as  his  being.  But  love  and  mercy  are 
transitive  in  their  nature ;  they  must  pass  over  from 
God  to  the  man  who  is  to  be  in  the  enjoyment  of 
their  blessing;  and  they  must  awaken  in  him  a  re- 
sponsive chord.  The  first  and  greatest  thing  which 
love  bestows  is  itself ;  that  is,  it  awakens  love  in  the 
heart  of  him  who  enjoys  its  sweet  influence;  and 
where  the  heart  does  not  allow  that  to  happen,  it  can 
not  be  in  the  enjoyment  of  its  blessings.  And  so  it  is 
with  mercy.  Only  he  who  is  merciful  can  hope  to 
obtain  mercy;  and  hence  he  who  is  continually 
standing  in  judgment  over  his  fellows,  condemning 
them  with  cold  and  critical  eye,  can  only  hope  to 
bring  down  similar  judgment  on  his  own  head. 

Again,  Jesus  demands  that  we  should  forgive. 
"  For  if  ye  forgive  men  their  trespasses,  your  heav- 
enly Father  will  also  forgive  you.  But  if  ye  forgive 
not  men  their  trespasses,  neither  will  your  Father 


260        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

forgive  your  trespasses  "  (Mt.  6 :  14,  15).  It  is  what 
the  golden  rule  demands  of  us.  We  are  all  sinners, 
and  stand  in  need  of  forgiveness.  And  as  Jesus  has 
taught  in  the  parable  of  the  Unmerciful  Servant 
(Mt.  18:  23-25),  our  debt  to  God  is  infinitely  great 
compared  with  any  debt  which  a  fellow-creature  may 
owe  to  us.  If  we  would  that  God  should  forgive  us 
the  greater  debt,  we  must  cultivate  the  forgiving 
spirit  with  reference  to  our  fellows.  And  the  force 
of  all  this  becomes  doubly  clear,  when  we  recall  that 
forgiveness  is  primarily,  not  the  removal  of  the  pen- 
alty of  our  transgressions,  but  the  removal  of  the  sin 
itself.  But  if  we  refuse  to  allow  God's  forgiving 
love  to  remove  the  unforgiving  disposition  from  our 
hearts,  we  refuse  to  allow  him  to  remove  the  sin. 

2)  Jesus  honoured  the  family.  At  the  age  of 
twelve  years,  he  went  down  from  Jerusalem  with 
Joseph  and  Mary,  and  ^'  was  subject  unto  them " 
(Lk.  2:  51).  He  lived  the  life  of  an  obedient  and 
dutiful  son.  'Not  only  was  he  present  at  a  marriage 
feast  and  performed  his  first  miracle  to  help  the 
festivities  of  the  occasion;  but  he  has  emphasized 
both  the  sanctity  and  the  indissolubility  of  the  mar- 
riage relation. 

On  one  occasion  towards  the  close  of  his  ministry 
the  Pharisees  came  to  Jesus  with  the  question,  "Is 
it  lawful  for  a  man  to  put  away  his  wife  ?  "  (Mk. 
10:2).  The  evangelist  adds  that  they  did  this  to 
try  him.  They  themselves  had  very  loose  views  on 
the  subject  of  marriage  and  divorce.     Indeed^  their 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        261 

law  had  made  divorce  easy.  Deuteronomy  24 : 1,  2 
contains  this  regulation :  "  When  a  man  taketh  a 
wife,  and  marrieth  her,  then  it  shall  be,  if  she  find 
no  favour  in  his  eyes,  because  he  hath  found  some 
unseemly  thing  in  her,  that  he  shall  write  her  a  bill 
of  divorcement,  and  give  it  in  her  hand,  and  send 
her  out  of  his  house.  And  when  she  is  departed  out 
of  his  house,  she  may  go  and  be  another  man's  wife." 
Their  interpretation  of  the  "  unseemly  thing  "  was 
so  broad  that  they  had  come  to  sanction  divorce  for 
almost  any  cause.  After  telling  them  that  because 
of  the  hardness  of  their  hearts,  Moses  had  suffered 
them  to  write  a  bill  of  divorcement  and  to  put  away 
their  wives,  Jesus  went  on  to  point  out  the  sacred- 
ness  of  the  marriage  relation.  He  referred  to  its 
institution.  "  From  the  beginning  of  the  creation, 
male  and  female  made  he  them"  (Mk.  10:6).  It 
was  hence  divine  in  its  origin  and  intent,  written 
deep  down  into  the  very  constitution  of  human  na- 
ture; and  hence  there  is  no  other  human  relation 
more  tender  or  more  close.  "  For  this  cause  shall 
a  man  leave  his  father  and  mother,  and  shall  cleave 
to  his  wife;  and  the  two  shall  become  one  flesh:  so 
that  they  are  no  more  two,  but  one  flesh.  What 
therefore  God  has  joined  together  let  not  man  put 
asunder"  (Mk.  10:7-9). 

The  implication  clearly  is  that  he  looked  upon 
marriage  as  indissoluble;  and  this  he  now  taught 
clearly,  when  he  and  the  disciples  were  alone  in  the 
house.     According  to  Matthew  the  disciples  seem  to 


26^        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

have  been  perplexed ;  for  they  said  to  him,  ^'  If  the 
case  of  the  man  is  so  with  his  wife,  it  is  not  expedient 
to  marry"  (Mt.  19: 10).  According  to  Mark,  they 
"  asked  him  concerning  this  matter '' ;  and  he  then 
gave  them  his  views  on  the  subject  of  divorce  in 
unequivocal  terms.  "  Whosoever  shall  put  away  his 
wife,  and  marry  another,  committeth  adultery  against 
her;  and  if  she  herself  shall  put  away  her  husband, 
and  marry  another,  she  committeth  adultery  "  (Mk. 
10: 11,  12).  This  clearly  forbids  divorce,  with  the 
privilege  of  marrying  again,  in  all  cases. 

It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  in  Matthew  an 
exception  is  given.  Here  the  statement  is,  ''  Whoso- 
ever shall  put  away  his  wife,  except  for  fornication, 
and  shall  marry  another,  committeth  adultery;  and 
he  that  marrieth  her  when  she  is  put  away  commit- 
teth adultery''  (Mt.  19:  9).  This  is  usually,  and  I 
think  correctly,  interpreted  to  mean  that  in  case  of 
adultery  divorce  is  permissible,  and  that  then  the 
innocent  party  may  marry  again.  But  the  question 
remains,  which  of  the  two  accounts  gives  us  the 
teaching  of  Jesus  correctly  ?  When  we  take  into  con- 
sideration that  Mark  is  the  source  which  Matthew 
here  used,  and  the  further  fact  that  the  first  evan- 
gelist probably  reflected  the  difficulty  which  the  dis- 
ciples themselves  seem  to  have  had  with  our  Lord's 
declaration,  the  probability  is  that  we  have  the  more 
original  and  the  more  accurate  account  in  Mark. 
We  hence  conclude  that  Jesus  meant  absolutely  to 
prohibit  divorce  with  the  privilege  of  remarriage. 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        263 

It  should,  however,  he  noted  still  further  that  the 
emphasis  lies  on  the  idea  of  remarriage.  Jesus  does 
not  here  insist  that  a  woman  must,  under  all  cir- 
cumstances, live  with  her  husband.  If  she  has  had 
the  misfortune  of  marrying  a  brute,  or  if  her  hus- 
band is  untrue  to  his  marriage  vows,  Jesus  does  not 
say  that  she  may  not  leave  him;  he  simply  teaches 
that,  if  she  does  leave,  she  may  not  marry  again 
while  he  is  living.  And  so  with  the  man.  The 
teaching  implies  that,  when  one  marries,  he  enters 
into  a  relation  which  only  death  can  sever;  and 
further  that  he  assumes  responsibilities  and  burdens, 
which  he  can  not  lay  aside,  so  long  as  his  partner 
is  living.  If  this  seems  a  hardship,  it  only  serves 
to  emphasize  the  sacredness  of  marriage,  and  to  show 
how  jealously  the  right  to  marry  should  be  guarded 
by  society. 

3)  Jesus  also  recognized  and  honoured  the  state. 
This  is  seen  first  of  all  in  his  conduct,  and  then  in 
his  teaching. 

As  we  conceive  it,  the  false  Messianic  ideal  of  his 
people  lay  at  the  very  heart  of  his  temptation  in  the 
wilderness.  'No  sooner  had  he  come  to  the  full  con- 
sciousness of  his  Messiahship  than  he  felt  himself 
confronted  by  that  ideal.  But  one  of  the  elements 
of  that  ideal  was  that  of  a  temporal  Messiah,  who 
should  throw  off  the  Roman  yoke.  Inseparably  con- 
nected with  it  was  disloyalty  to  the  government  under 
which  he  lived,  l^ow,  his  resistance  of  that  tempta- 
tion was  not  simply  the  affirmation  of  a  different,  a 


264        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

spiritual  ideal;  but  it  also  involved  the  refusal  to 
lead  his  people  in  insurrection  against  the  lawfully 
established  government.  And  the  same  must  be 
said  of  the  attempt  of  the  people  to  take  him  by 
force  to  make  him  a  king,  immediately  after  the 
feeding  of  the  five  thousand  (Jn.  6: 15).  So  when 
the  question  about  the  temple  tax  arose.  Though  he 
said  that,  as  the  Son,  he  might  claim  exemption,  he 
sent  Peter  to  catch  the  fish  wherewith  to  make  the 
payment  (Mt.  17:24-27).  The  temple  was  a  part 
of  the  national  organization  of  his  people;  and  he 
did  not  refuse  to  bear  his  share  of  the  burden  of  its 
maintenance. 

On  the  last  great  day  of  his  public  ministry,  the 
day  of  controversy  in  the  temple,  the  Tuesday  of 
Holy  Week,  the  Pharisees  with  the  Herodians 
came  to  ask  him  about  paying  tribute  to  Caesar. 
They  thought  they  would  place  him  on  either  horn 
of  a  dilemma.  If  he  should  say,  Yes;  it  is  lawful, 
they  expected  him  to  alienate  the  people:  if  he 
should  say,  Xo;  it  is  not  lawful,  they  thought  he 
must  offend  the  Roman  government.  How  he  walked 
through  the  snare  which  they  had  laid  for  him  is 
well  known ;  but  in  doing  so,  he  laid  down  a  doctrine 
which  clearly  showed  his  attitude  towards  the  state. 
"  Render  to  Csesar  the  things  that  are  Csesar's,  and 
unto  God  the  things  that  are  God's  "  (:Mk.  12: 17). 
By  accepting  the  coinage  of  the  Roman  empire,  the 
Jews  had  acknowledged  their  indebtedness  to  it ;  and 
it  was  hence  their  duty  to  support  it.     And  that  is 


THE  LIFE  OF  THE  KINGDOM        265 

the  teaching  of  Jesus  with  reference  to  our  relation 
to  the  state  universally.  Imperfect  though  it  may 
be,  we  should  give  to  it  our  loyal  support. 

The  same  truth  is  probably  implied  in  another  of 
the  Lord's  sayings.  When  speaking  of  retaliation,  he 
said,  ^'  And  whosoever  shall  compel  thee  to  go  one 
mile,  go  with  him  two  "  (Mt.  5  :  41).  The  reference 
is  to  a  law  which  had  been  introduced  from  Persia, 
in  accordance  with  which  an  officer  of  the  government 
might  impress  any  one  into  the  service  to  assist  in 
carrying  burdens,  especially  those  of  the  army. 
!N'ow,  the  meaning  of  Jesus  seems  to  be,  if  the  gov- 
ernment makes  such  exactions  of  you,  be  ready  not 
simply  to  do  what  is  demanded  but  even  more. 
Translated  into  our  modern  conditions,  it  means.  Be 
willing,  as  a  citizen,  not  simply  to  perform  your 
duty  to  the  state,  but  to  offer  yourself,  when  occasion 
requires  it,  to  her  service. 


XI 
THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM 

A  BOVE  in  chapter  VI,  we  saw  that  Jesus  spoke 
A\  of  the  kingdom  both  as  present  and  future. 
It  is  a  present  possession  for  all  who  have 
responded  to  his  call  to  repentance,  and  who  have, 
however  imperfectly,  submitted  themselves  to  the 
divine  rule.  They  have  a  foretaste  of  the  joys  and 
blessings  which  the  kingdom  has  in  store  for  all  the 
faithful.  They  now  have  eternal  life.  And  yet  the 
kingdom  is  also  a  blessed  hope.  It  is  that  even  more 
than  a  present  possession.  All  that  the  best  can 
claim  is  a  foretaste  of  the  glorious  reality.  Their 
best  obedience  is  but  an  earnest  of  what  it  will  be, 
when  at  last  God's  will  shall  be  done  on  earth  as  it 
is  in  heaven.  Looked  at  from  any  point  of  view,  the 
consummation  of  the  kingdom  is  in  the  future;  and 
between  that  and  the  present  there  remains  a  mar- 
vellous transformation  to  be  accomplished.  How  are 
we  to  conceive  of  that  transformation  ? 

Two  answers  have  been  suggested ;  and  both  claim 
to  have  the  support  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  The 
one  represents  the  kingdom  as  reaching  its  consum- 
mation through  a  long  and  slow  process  of  develop- 
ment; the  other,  as  ushered  in  by  some  great  catas- 

266 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     267 

trophe,  breaking  in  upon  the  world  suddenly,  like 
a  lightning  flash,  which  shineth  from  one  part  of 
the  heaven  to  the  other,  and  as  taking  place  in  the 
lifetime  of  some  of  his  disciples.  The  one  represents 
the  kingdom  as  subject  to  the  law  of  growth  having 
its  origin  in  a  small  beginning,  as  in  a  seed,  and  then 
through  a  silent  and  secret  process  of  growth  over- 
spreading the  earth,  and  transforming  the  world; 
the  other  conceives  of  it  as  ushered  in  through  the 
direct  intervention  of  Almighty  God,  who  will  vindi- 
cate the  right  and  overthrow  the  wrong  in  some  great 
and  final  crisis. 

Both  views  make  their  appeal  to  the  teaching  of 
Jesus ;  and  there  are  passages  which  may  easily  be 
brought  forward  in  support  of  either.  At  first  sight 
they  seem  to  be  contradictory.  Whether  they  are 
really  so  can  be  determined  only  by  a  careful  study 
of  the  actual  sayings  of  Jesus. 

1.    The  Kingdom  Subject  to  the  Law  of  Growth 

There  are  two  classes  of  passages  which  support 
the  former  view.  The  one  emphasizes  the  idea  of 
delay  in  the  final  consummation ;  the  other,  in  addi- 
tion to  this  conception,  represents  the  kingdom  as 
subject  to  the  universal  law  of  development  and 
growth. 

1)  There  is  first  of  all  the  statement  with  refer- 
ence to  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  to  the  Gentiles. 
According  to  Mark,  Jesus  is  reported  to  have  said, 


^68        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

"  And  the  gospel  must  first  be  preached  to  all  na- 
tions''  (Mk.  13:10).  It  is  part  of  the  great  dis- 
course, which  Jesus  spoke  on  the  Mount  of  Olives 
on  the  Tuesday  evening  of  Holy  Week.  As  the 
discourse  stands  in  Mark,  it  may  be  a  question 
v^hether  the  reference  is  to  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem exclusively,  or  also  to  the  end  of  the  world. 
In  either  case,  the  idea  is  that  before  the  catastrophe 
under  consideration  could  take  place,  there  would  be 
a  period  of  delay,  during  which  the  glad  tidings  of 
salvation  would  be  presented  to  the  whole  of  the  Gen- 
tile world.  Even  though  Jesus  may  have  thought 
only  of  the  Roman  world,  it  presupposes  a  period  of 
delay  before  the  final  consummation.  And  the  form 
given  to  the  saying  in  Matthew  clearly  refers  to  it 
to  the  end.  "  And  this  gospel  of  the  kingdom  shall 
be  preached  in  the  whole  world  for  a  testimony  unto 
all  nations ;  and  then  shall  the  end  come  ^'  (Mt. 
24 :  14) .  And  if,  as  seems  to  be  the  case,  the  saying 
implies  that  there  would  be  a  day  of  grace  for  the 
Gentiles,  as  there  had  been  for  the  Jews,  then  cer- 
tainly it  suggests  a  long  period  of  delay;  for  the 
Jews  had  centuries  for  their  preparation  for  the  re- 
ception of  the  kingdom,  and  one  would  expect  God 
to  give  no  less  to  all  the  nations  of  the  Gentile  world. 
A  number  of  parables  contain  the  same  suggestion. 
In  the  parable  of  the  Ten  Virgins,  the  bridegroom 
is  represented  as  tarrying  long  beyond  the  expected 
time,  so  that  all  those  virgins  nodded  and  slept  (Mt. 
25:5).     A  similar  suggestion  is  contained  in  the 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     269 

parable  of  the  Unjust  Judge.  There  Jesus  says, 
"  And  shall  not  God  avenge  his  elect,  that  cry  unto 
him  day  and  night,  and  yet  he  is  longsuffering  over 
them"  (Lk.  18:7).  It  is  a  parable  teaching  the 
lesson  of  God's  justice  mingled  with  mercy.  His 
elect  are  suffering  many  things;  they  are  crying  to 
him  day  and  night;  and  he  seems  not  to  hear  their 
cry.  Yet  his  indifference  to  their  cry  is  only  ap- 
parent; he  is  only  giving  their  enemies  time  for 
repentance;  he  will  avenge  his  elect;  and,  when 
looked  at  from  the  standpoint  of  the  eternal  years, 
the  day  of  vengeance  will  come  speedily ;  but  looked 
at  from  our  point  of  view  it  seems  long  delayed. 
The  same  moral  is  practically  implied  in  the  re- 
peated exhortations  to  "  watch  " ;  for  while  all  these 
exhortations  emphasize  the  uncertainty  of  the  day 
and  the  hour,  they  also  imply  that  it  may  be  delayed 
much  beyond  the  expected  time.  This  is  especially 
true  of  the  parable  of  the  Unfaithful  Upper  Servant 
(Mt.  24:45-51).  That  was  spoken  to  illustrate  the 
need  and  the  meaning  of  watchfulness.  To  watch 
means  to  be  always  about  one's  duty,  as  if  one  were 
looking  for  the  appearance  of  the  Lord  every  mo- 
ment. But  this  servant  said  in  his  heart,  "  My  lord 
delayeth  his  coming " ;  and  with  that  thought  in 
mind,  he  began  to  beat  his  fellow-servants,  and  to 
eat  and  drink,  and  to  be  drunken.  There  must  have 
been  some  justification  for  his  conclusion  that  the 
lord  was  delaying  his  coming.  Some  considerable 
time  must  have  elapsed,  before  he  could  have  ven- 


^70        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

tured  to  resign  himself  to  such  an  attitude  of  mind. 
So  in  the  parable  of  the  Talents,  the  lord  is  repre- 
sented, not  simply  as  going  into  another  country,  but 
as  being  absent  a  long  time.  The  servants  had  suf- 
ficient time  to  trade  with  their  talents  and  to  mul- 
tiply them.  '^  Now  after  a  long  time  the  lord  of 
those  servants  cometh,  and  maketh  a  reckoning  with 
them''  (Mt.  25:19). 

All  these  representations  suggest  the  idea  of  a 
considerable  period  of  time  intervening  between  the 
founding  of  the  kingdom  and  its  consummation. 
They  do  not  suggest  the  thought  that  the  final  judg- 
ment would  take  place  immediately.  All  of  them 
point  to  a  suspended  judgment  rather  than  to  a 
judgment  close  at  hand. 

2)  Alongside  of  this  representation,  we  have  an- 
other, which  points  to  the  condition  of  the  kingdom 
during  this  interval.  While  the  Son  of  man  is  tarry- 
ing, the  kingdom  itself  is  growing.  This  idea  of  the 
growth  of  the  kingdom  is  brought  forward  in,  at  least, 
^ve  distinct  parables.  These  are  the  Sower,  the 
Tares  of  the  Field,  the  Seed  Growing  Secretly,  the 
Mustard  Seed,  and  the  Leaven.  These  illustrate 
various  aspects  of  the  growth  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven. 

In  four  of  these  parables  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
is  likened  unto  a  seed  that  is  sown.  Like  a  seed, 
the  kingdom  is  at  first  very  small ;  and  from  small 
beginnings  it  grows  into  something  that  is  large. 
But  more  than  that.     It  has  life  in  itself;  so  that, 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     271 

when  it  is  surrounded  by  the  proper  conditions,  it 
unfolds  and  grows.  That  is  the  point  especially  em- 
phasized in  the  parable  of  the  Seed  Growing  Se- 
cretly (Mk.  4:26-29).  The  husbandman  casts  his 
seed  into  the  ground ;  then  he  sleeps  and  rises  night 
and  day;  and  the  seed  springs  up  and  grows,  he 
knows  not  how.  That  is,  after  the  ground  has  been 
properly  prepared  and  the  seed  properly  sown,  the 
husbandman  has  done  his  part,  beyond  which  he  can 
do  nothing  more.  The  growth  and  the  subsequent 
harvest  then  depend  on  the  seed  and  on  the  ground 
into  which  it  has  been  sown.  If  the  seed  has  vitality, 
and  if  the  soil  has  the  proper  elements  suited  to  the 
development  of  the  plant,  the  growth  will  come  of 
itself.  The  husbandman  can  go  about  his  business, 
until  the  time  of  harvest  comes,  assured  that  in  due 
time  there  will  be  blade  and  ear  and  full  corn  in 
the  ear.  And  so  with  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  It 
too  has  a  vitality  of  its  own;  and,  when  sown  into 
the  heart  of  man,  if  that  heart  has  been  properly 
cultivated,  and  if  it  has  the  disposition  needed  for 
the  development  of  the  kingdom,  it  too  will  grow  of 
itself;  and,  however  mysterious  the  process  may  be, 
the  harvest  is  sure  to  come. 

The  parable  of  the  Mustard  Seed  (Mt.  13 :  31-32), 
in  addition  to  this  idea  of  growth,  has  in  it  also  the 
thought  of  growing  from  a  very  small  beginning  to 
that  which  is  great.  It  illustrates  the  external  de- 
velopment of  the  kingdom.  As  the  mustard  seed  is 
the  smallest  of  seeds,  when  it  is  sown,  and  yet  grows 


272        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

into  a  tree  larger  than  all  herbs ;  so  was  the  kingdom 
in  its  beginning  the  most  insignificant  of  all  the 
kingdoms  of  which  we  have  knowledge,  and  yet 
it  has  grown  into  the  mightiest  power  which  the 
mind  of  man  has  conceived.  And  it  is  destined 
to  continue  its  growth,  nntil  it  has  covered  the 
earth. 

The  parable  of  the  Leaven  (Mt.  13:  33)  is  a  com- 
panion piece.  As  that  of  the  Mustard  Seed  illus- 
trates the  external  development  of  the  kingdom,  so 
does  this  set  forth  its  inward  transforming  power. 
As  the  leaven  leavens  the  whole  lump  in  which  it  ig 
hidden,  so  does  the  kingdom  of  God  permeate  and 
transform  the  whole  of  human  society  into  which  it 
has  come,  l^ot  only  is  it  to  cover  the  earth  in  the 
way  of  winning  all  nations  to  the  standard  of  the 
cross;  but  it  is  to  transform  its  life  so  that  all  its 
institutions,  all  its  various  activities,  all  its  gov- 
ernments, all  its  commerce  and  trade  shall  be  brought 
under  the  divine  rule,  and  be  made  to  reflect  God's 
will  on  earth  as  perfectly  as  it  is  done  in  heaven. 
All  the  kingdoms  of  this  world,  political,  social, 
economic,  scientific,  as  well  as  ecclesiastical,  shall 
become  the  kingdom  of  God  and  of  his  Christ. 

Jesus  thus  marked  out  for  himself  and  for  his 
kingdom  a  very  large  programme,  and  one  which, 
in  the  nature  of  the  case,  required  a  long  time  to 
realize.  If  he  had  any  just  conception  of  what  is 
implied  in  the  analogy  of  growth,  which  he  so  freely 
employed,  it  is  hard  to  see  how  he  can  have  thought 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     273 

of  that  programme  as  completed  in  a  very  brief 
space  of  time.  One  can  hardly  avoid  the  conviction 
that  he  must  have  meant  all  that  is  implied  in  his 
various  statements  on  the  subject  of  the  delayed 
parousia  and  the  suspended  judgment,  and  that  he 
can  not  have  thought  of  the  consummation  of  the 
kingdom  as  close  at  hand.  And  yet,  as  intimated 
above,  there  is  another  class  of  sayings,  which  seem 
to  imply  that  he  shared  the  common  opinion  of  his 
day  that  the  end  was  nigh,  even  at  the  door.  A  com- 
plete survey  of  his  teaching  on  the  point  will  hence 
require  us  to  turn  to  these  statements,  which  seem 
to  be  contradictory  of  those  which  we  have  just  con- 
sidered. 

2.    Development  through  Crises 

In  Matthew  16:28  we  have  a  statement,  which,  if 
taken  by  itself,  seems  to  imply  that  Jesus  thought 
of  the  consummation  as  near.  "  Verily,  I  say  unto 
you,  There  be  some  of  them  that  stand  here,  who 
shall  in  no  wise  taste  of  death,  till  they  see  the  Son 
of  man  coming  in  his  kingdom.''  To  the  mind  of 
the  evangelist,  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  had 
reference  to  the  final  coming,  to  the  end.  But  it  is 
worth  while  noting  that  in  the  parallel  passages  in 
Mark  and  Luke,  the  reference  to  the  end  is  by  no 
means  so  clear.  Mark,  whose  narrative  here  is  un- 
doubtedly the  source  which  was  employed  by  both 
the  first  and  third  evangelists,  has  the  saying  in 
this  form :  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  There  be  some 


^74        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

here  of  them  that  stand  by,  who  shall  not  taste  of 
death,  till  they  see  the  kingdom  of  God  come  with 
power "  (Mk.  9:1);  and  Luke  has  here  followed 
Mark  more  closely  than  Matthew.  He  reports  the 
logion  as  follows :  "  But  I  tell  you  of  a  truth,  There 
be  some  of  them  that  stand  here,  who  shall  in  no 
wise  taste  of  death,  till  they  see  the  kingdom  of 
God"  (Lk.  9:27).  The  occasion  was  our  Lord's 
first  prediction  of  his  approaching  sufferings  and 
death.  After  Peter  had  attempted  to  rebuke  him  for 
entertaining  such  dismal  thoughts  about  his  future, 
and  after  Jesus  had  administered  to  him  that  sting- 
ing rebuke  which  he  must  have  remembered  to  his 
dying  day,  Jesus  went  on  to  tell  the  disciples  of  the 
cross  which  they  would  each  of  them  have  to  bear, 
if  they  would  follow  him.  And  then  he  pointed  out 
that,  no  matter  what  they  should  be  called  upon  to 
suffer  for  his  sake,  there  would  be  ample  compensa- 
tions in  his  kingdom.  And  for  those  compensations 
they  would  not  need  to  wait  indefinitely.  Some  of 
them  would  live  to  see  the  day  when  they  would  be 
distributed.  Some  of  them  would  live  to  see  the 
kingdom  established  with  power  and  then  they  would 
begin  to  realize  the  blessings  which  they  should  re- 
ceive as  compensations  for  the  trials  which  they 
would  be  called  upon  to  endure.  Besides  the  fact 
that  Mark,  who  was  the  source  here  used  by  the  first 
evangelist,  uses  the  expression  in  a  form  which 
refers  to  the  firm  establishment  of  the  kingdom  rather 
than  to  its  consummation,  the  entire  incident  can  be 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     275 

more  easily  interpreted  in  that  way  than  by  making 
it  refer  to  the  end  of  the  world. 

Another  passage,  which  seems  to  refer  the  end  to 
the  generation  in  which  Jesus  was  then  living,  is 
found  in  Matthew  24 :  34.  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you, 
This  generation  shall  not  pass  away,  till  all  these 
things  shall  be  accomplished.''  Mark  and  Luke  re- 
port the  words  in  the  same  form,  so  that  there  can 
hardly  be  any  question  that  this  saying  was  spoken 
by  Jesus  in  substantially  the  form  in  which  Matthew 
gives  it.  ITeither  can  there  be  much  question  as  to 
the  meaning  of  the  words,  in  the  connection  in  which 
he  reports  them.  According  to  Matthew,  Jesus  was 
speaking  of  the  signs  of  the  coming  of  the  Son  of 
man,  and  of  the  end  of  the  world.  This  is  apparent 
from  the  manner  in  which  he  introduces  the  dis- 
course. Jesus  had  just  left  the  temple.  As  he  was 
leaving,  '^  his  disciples  came  unto  him  to  show  him 
the  buildings  of  the  temple  " ;  and  he  replied,  '^  See 
ye  all  these  things  ?  verily  I  say  unto  you,  There  shall 
not  be  left  here  one  stone  upon  another,  that  shall 
not  be  thrown  down."  And  then  after  he  had  gone 
out  to  the  Mount  of  Olives,  the  disciples  came  unto 
him  privately  to  ask  him  concerning  the  prediction. 
Their  question,  however,  is  reported  differently. 
According  to  Mark,  who  here  again  is  the  source, 
which  was  employed  by  the  other  two,  the  question 
was  as  follows :  "  Tell  us,  when  shall  these  things 
be  ?  and  what  shall  be  the  sign  when  these  things  are 
all  about  to  be  accomplished?"  (Mk.  13:4).     That 


^6        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

is,  the  reference  is  to  the  prediction  which  Jesus  had 
just  made  on  leaving  the  temple.  And  with  this 
Luke  agrees  (Lk.  21:  7).  But  Matthew  has  allowed 
his  peculiar  eschatalogical  predilection  again  to 
modify  the  original  saying;  and  he  has  reported 
the  question  of  the  disciples  in  this  form,  "  Tell  us, 
when  shall  these  things  be?  and  what  shall  be  the 
sign  of  thy  coming,  and  of  the  end  of  the  world  '' 
(Mt.  24:3)  ;  and  he  has  given  a  similar  colouring 
to  the  entire  discourse.  He  makes  the  discourse  have 
a  double  reference,  that  w^hich  it  has  in  Mark, 
namely,  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  end 
of  the  world;  and  hence  he  makes  Jesus  predict  the 
coming  of  the  Son  of  man  and  the  end  of  the  world 
in  that  generation. 

But  can  the  entire  discourse,  even  as  it  is  found 
in  Mark,  be  limited  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ? 
There  is  room  for  difference  of  opinion;  and  many 
have  answered  the  question  in  the  negative.  It  is 
indeed  generally  taken  for  granted  that  at  verse  24 
Jesus  begins  to  speak  of  the  end  of  the  world.  "  But 
in  those  days,  after  that  tribulation,  the  sun  shall 
be  darkened,  and  the  moon  shall  not  give  her  light, 
and  the  stars  shall  be  falling  from  heaven,  and  the 
powers  that  are  in  the  heavens  shall  be  shaken.  And 
then  shall  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  the 
clouds  of  heaven  with  great  power  and  glory.  And 
then  shall  he  send  forth  the  angels,  and  shall  gather 
together  his  elect  from  the  four  winds,  from  the  utter- 
most part   of  the   earth  to  the  uttermost  part  of 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     277 

heaven."     Can  language  like  this  refer  to  anything 
but  the  end  of  the  world  ? 

Before  hastily  giving  an  answer,  we  need  to  com- 
pare the  portents  here  spoken  of  with  similar  ones  in 
the  apocalyptic  discourses  of  the  prophets.  The 
darkening  of  sun  and  moon,  the  falling  of  the  stars, 
and  the  commotion  among  the  heavenly  powers  are 
common  features  of  the  apocalyptic  imagery  of 
prophecy.  Thus  when  Isaiah  is  speaking  of  the  de- 
struction of  Babylon  by  the  Medes,  he  uses  similar 
language.  "  For  the  stars  of  heaven  and  the  constel- 
lations thereof  shall  not  give  their  light ;  the  sun  shall 
be  darkened  in  its  going  forth,  and  the  moon  shall  not 
cause  its  light  to  shine"  (Isa.  13:10).  Again  in 
predicting  the  judgment  on  Edom,  he  says,  "  And 
all  the  host  of  heaven  shall  be  dissolved,  and  the 
heavens  shall  be  rolled  together  as  a  scroll;  and  all 
their  host  shall  fade  away,  as  the  leaf  fadeth  from 
the  fig-tree"  (Isa.  34:4).  Similar  language  may 
be  found  in  Ezekiel  32 :  7,  8,  with  reference  to  the 
judgTaent  on  Egypt ;  in  Amos  8 :  9  with  reference  to 
the  northern  kingdom;  and  in  Joel  2:  30,  31,  where 
the  reference  is  to  the  judgment  on  the  nations.  In 
none  of  these  places  is  the  reference  to  the  end  of 
the  world,  but  to  the  judgments  about  to  be  visited 
on  different  peoples.  As  Dr.  Gould  puts  it,  "  This 
language  is  intended  to  portray  the  greatness  of  the 
doom  of  such  nations  as  come  under  the  judgment 
of  God.  When  he  comes  to  judgment,  the  earth,  and 
even  the  heavens  dissolve  before  him.     But   it  is 


^78        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

needless  to  minimize  these  words  into  eclipses,  or 
earthquakes,  or  meteoric  showers,  or  to  magnify 
them  into  actual  destruction  of  sun  and  moon  and 
stars.  They  are  not  events,  but  only  imaginative 
portrayal  of  what  it  means  for  God  to  interfere  in 
the  history  of  nations."  ^  And  so  with  the  words 
before  us.  They  do  not  describe  the  actual  destruc- 
tion of  sun,  moon,  and  stars  at  the  end  of  history; 
but  they  are  an  imaginative,  apocalyptical  portrayal 
of  the  greatness  of  the  doom  which  was  overhanging 
Jerusalem.  And  very  much  the  same  may  be  said 
about  ''the  Son  of  man  coming  in  the  clouds  with 
great  power  and  glory.''  A  comparison  of  Psalm 
97 : 1-5,  Isaiah  19 : 1,  Zechariah  9 :  14,  Psalm 
18 :  5-16  shows  that  similar  language  is  used  of  Je- 
hovah ;  and  as  Dr.  Gould  says,  usage  makes  it  unnec- 
essary to  take  the  language  literally ;  and  in  this  case 
"  the  immediate  connection  with  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  makes  it  impossible."  ^ 

We  hence  conclude  that  all  the  references  in  the 
great  apocalyptic  discourse  are  to  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  and  not  to  the  end  of  the  world.  It  is 
far  easier  to  believe  that,  where  Matthew  has  reported 
the  words  of  Jesus  in  such  a  way  as  to  imply  that  the 
consummation  of  the  kingdom  was  about  to  come  in 
that  generation,  he  has  allowed  his  eschatological 
predilection  to  read  into  the  words  of  Jesus  what 
was  not  there  originally,  than  it  is  to  believe  that 

*  The  International  Critical  Commentary ;  Mark,  p.  250. 
^Op.  cit.,  p.  251. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     279 

Jesus,  in  spite  of  so  much  teaching  to  the  contrary, 
can  have  been  so  greatly  mistaken  as  to  imagine  the 
end  to  be  so  near. 

But  if  this  interpretation  eliminates  the  reference 
to  the  final  coming  from  the  immediate  future,  it 
only  emphasizes  the  certainty  that  the  Son  of  man 
is  coming  all  the  while,  and  that  with  his  coming 
there  is  always  bound  up  the  exercise  of  his  judicial 
function,  by  which  the  wicked  are  overthrown  and 
the  righteous  vindicated.  There  is  one  statement, 
which  refers  to  such  a  continual  coming  of  the  Son 
of  man,  made  too  in  language  almost  identical  with 
that  which  we  have  just  studied.  When  Jesus  stood 
before  the  high  priest  at  his  trial,  the  high  priest 
adjured  him  by  the  living  God  to  tell  whether  he  was 
the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God.  His  reply  was,  "  Thou 
hast  said:  nevertheless  I  say  unto  you,  Henceforth 
ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  sitting  at  the  right  hand 
of  power,  and  coming  on  the  clouds  of  heaven  "  (Mt. 
26:64).  The  ^^  henceforth  "  means  from  now  on; 
and  it  relates,  not  simply  to  the  Son  of  man's  sitting 
at  the  right  hand  of  power,  but  just  as  really  also  to 
his  coming  on  the  clouds  of  heaven.  That  too  began 
from  that  day,  and  it  has  been  going  on  all  the  while. 
He  came  ^^  on  the  clouds  of  heaven  "  in  the  awful 
crisis,  which  overtook  Jerusalem  and  its  people  in 
the  year  a.d.  70;  and  he  is  thus  coming  in  every 
crisis  in  the  history  of  the  world. 

There  is  an  element  in  the  teaching  of  the  parable 
of  the  Tares  of  the  Field,  which  throws  light  on  the 


280         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

coming  of  the  Son  of  man  in  the  successive  crises  of 
history.  The  kingdom  of  light  at  no  time  has  the 
entire  field  of  the  world's  history  all  to  itself.  After 
the  good  seed  of  the  kingdom  had  been  sown,  the 
enemy  came  and  sowed  tares  among  the  wheat. 
These  sprang  up  with  the  wheat;  and  so  intimately 
were  they  related  to  the  wheat  that  separation  be- 
tween them,  prior  to  the  harvest,  was  impossible. 
The  meaning  is  that  the  kingdom  of  light  exists 
alongside  of,  and  in  perpetual  antagonism  with  the 
powers  of  darkness.  Both  have  a  vitality  of  their 
own.  Both  are  growing.  And  they  are  never  at 
peace  with  each  other.  There  is  perpetual  conflict 
between  the  light  and  the  darkness.  As  the  two 
unfold  side  by  side,  crises  are  precipitated,  in  which 
the  one  or  the  other  comes  off  victorious.  And  just  as 
it  was  with  the  crisis,  in  which  Jerusalem  was  over- 
thrown, so  is  it  in  every  crisis.  The  Son  of  man  is 
coming  on  the  clouds,  that  is,  clothed  with  the  power 
of  Almighty  God;  and  through  tribulation  and  an- 
guish, he  is  bringing  victory  to  his  own.  And  these 
crises,  just  like  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  are 
each  of  them  a  type,  a  prophecy,  of  the  final  crisis. 
They  are  the  outcome  of  the  same  conflict  between 
light  and  darkness;  they  imply  the  same  coming  of 
the  Son  of  God  to  judgment;  and  they  bring  the 
same  kind  of  victory,  though  in  a  lower  degree,  for 
the  kingdom  of  light.  They  are  hence  the  way 
through  which  the  development  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  is  being  brought  about.     The  development  is 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     281 

through  crises,  in  which  God  is  continually  coming 
with  his  almighty  powder  to  vindicate  the  right  and 
to  overthrow  and  judge  the  wrong. 

Both  views  as  to  the  development  of  the  kingdom, 
mentioned  at  the  beginning  of  this  chapter,  have  ele- 
ments of  truth.  In  fact,  they  are  mutually  comple- 
mentary. The  kingdom  is  subject  to  the  law  of  de- 
velopment and  growth,  found  in  all  nature;  and  it 
is  likewise  ushered  in  through  the  direct  interven- 
tion of  Almighty  God.  It  is  the  ever-present  power 
of  God,  working  by  the  Spirit  through  the  Word,  that 
energizes  the  seed,  and  gives  it  the  ability  to  grow; 
and  it  is  that  same  power  of  God,  presiding  in  the 
movements  of  history,  which,  in  the  ever-present 
conflict  between  the  good  and  the  evil,  brings  the 
evil  to  judgment  and  gives  the  victory  to  the  good. 
In  the  apocalyptic  representations,  this  ever-present 
power  of  God  is  always  presented  in  a  pictorial  form ; 
and  in  consequence,  God  is  represented  as  standing 
on  the  outside  of  the  movements  of  history,  and  com- 
ing in  external  judgments.  That  representation 
needs  to  be  complemented  by  the  other,  which  seems 
not  to  take  account  of  the  power  of  God  at  all,  be- 
cause he  is  present  there  as  an  inward  life-giving 
energy,  working  from  within. 

3.    TTie  Propagation  of  the  Kingdom 

What  now  are  the  means  by  which  the  kingdom, 
during  this  period  of  development  and  growth,  is 


THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

propagated  in  the  world  ?  The  question  leads  us  to 
inquire  into  the  weapons  which  Jesus  placed  into  the 
hands  of  his  disciples,  when  he  sent  them  forth  to 
conquer  the  world. 

The  fact,  which  here  first  of  all  suggests  itself, 
comes  to  us  by  way  of  contrast.  The  weapons  are 
not  carnal,  such  as  are  used  by  the  princes  of  this 
world  in  making  their  conquests.  When  Jesus  sent 
forth  the  Twelve  on  their  mission,  he  said,  "  Get 
you  no  gold,  nor  silver,  nor  brass  in  your  purses ;  no 
wallet  for  your  journey,  neither  two  coats,  nor  shoes, 
nor  staff :  for  the  labourer  is  worthy  of  his  hire  " 
(Mt.  10:9,  10).  It  is  true,  that  was  spoken  with 
special  reference  to  that  particular  mission;  and  it 
would  be  a  mistake  to  apply  it  literally  to  the  dis- 
ciples of  all  ages.  It  also  had  reference  primarily 
to  their  means  of  support,  rather  than  to  the  means 
to  be  employed  in  their  work.  And  yet  it  suggests 
an  important  principle,  which  is  applicable  to  all  the 
workers  of  the  kingdom,  no  matter  where  or  when 
they  may  be  employed.  ISTot  only  must  the  min- 
ister of  the  Gospel,  who  would  win  the  world  for 
Christ,  rely  on  his  work  for  his  support;  he  must 
likewise  look  to  the  message,  which  is  placed  into 
his  lips,  as  the  weapon  by  which  to  gain  his  vic- 
tories. Gold  and  silver  and  brass,  useful  and  im- 
portant as  they  may  be  in  the  affairs  of  this  life, 
have  no  value  in  themselves  for  the  development  of 
the  kingdom.  They  may  be  used  for  higher  ends; 
but  in  themselves  they  are  not  coin  current  in  the 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     283 

kingdom  of  God.  They  can  not  purchase  the  quali- 
ties, which  characterize  the  citizen  of  the  kingdom. 
^N'either  is  the  kingdom  propagated  by  the  power  of 
external  authority.  "  Ye  know  that  they  who  are 
accounted  to  rule  over  the  Gentiles  lord  it  over  them ; 
and  their  great  ones  exercise  authority  over  them.'' 
It  is  the  way  in  which  the  kingdoms  of  this  world 
are  built  up.  ''  But  it  is  not  so  among  you ;  but  who- 
soever would  become  great  among  you,  shall  be  your 
minister;  and  whosoever  would  be  first  among  you 
shall  be  servant  of  all  "  (Mk.  10 :  42-44).  Greatness 
and  influence  in  the  kingdom  are  attained  through 
self-denying  service — through  the  power  of  love. 
Hence  also  the  sword  is  excluded.  When  at  the  time 
of  the  arrest  of  Jesus  in  the  garden,  Peter  drew  his 
sword,  and  smote  the  servant  of  the  high  priest,  Jesus 
said  to  him,  "  Put  up  again  thy  sword  into  its  place : 
for  all  that  take  the  sword  shall  perish  with  the 
sword"  (Mt.  26:52). 

The  weapons  by  which  the  world  is  to  be  won  for 
Christ  are  spiritual.  In  the  great  commission,  which 
Matthew  has  recorded  at  the  close  of  his  Gospel,  two 
of  these  are  mentioned.  The  one  is  teaching,  the 
other  is  baptizing  in  the  triune  name.  "  All  author- 
ity hath  been  given  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth.  Go 
ye  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  bap- 
tizing them  into  the  name  of  the  Eather  and  of  the 
Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit :  teaching  them  to  observe 
all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you:  and 
lo,  I  am  with  you  always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the 


^84         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

world"  (Mt.  28:18-20).  That  is,  teaching  and 
baptizing  are  given  as  the  means  by  which  the 
disciples  were  sent  forth  to  make  disciples  of  all 
nations. 

1)  In  his  explanation  of  the  parable  of  the  Sower, 
as  given  by  Luke,  Jesus  defines  the  seed  as  the  Word 
of  God  (Lk.  8: 11).  That  is  sown  into  the  hearts 
of  men.  If  these  have  been  properly  prepared,  the 
seed  springs  up  and  bears  fruit,  some  thirty,  some 
sixty,  and  some  an  hundredfold.  The  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  in  the  Word,  as  preached  by  the  dis- 
ciples of  Jesus ;  and  though,  like  the  husbandman  in 
the  parable  of  the  Seed  Growing  Secretly,  they  can 
do  nothing  beyond  sowing  the  seed,  that  is,  preaching 
the  Word,  the  Word  has  in  it  a  vitality  which  will 
make  it  sprout  and  grow  and  bear  fruit.  It  seems 
like  an  insignificant  weapon;  yet,  bearing  in  itself 
the  truth  of  God,  it  is  the  mightiest  power  in  the 
world. 

In  the  parable  of  the  Tares  of  the  Field,  the  sub- 
ject is  presented  from  a  slightly  different  point  of 
view.  Here  the  good  seed  is  '^  the  sons  of  the  king- 
dom "  (Mt.  13  :  38).  Having  themselves  been  quick- 
ened by  the  power  of  the  Spirit,  residing  in  the 
Word,  they  each  of  them  become  centres  of  influence, 
capable  of  winning  others  unto  Christ.  They  become 
living  embodiments  of  the  truth,  as  it  is  in  Jesus; 
and  by  the  power  of  their  example  they  proclaim  the 
gospel  of  Jesus,  and  win  for  it  the  respect  and  the 
allegiance  of  men.     "  Ye  are  the  light  of  the  world. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     285 

.  .  .  Even  so  let  your  light  shine  before  men;  that 
they  may  see  your  good  works,  and  glorify  your 
Father  who  is  in  heaven''  (Mt.  5 :  14,  16). 

2)  The  preaching  of  the  gospel  aims  at  producing 
conviction,  and  seeks  to  lead  men  to  repentance  and 
an  open  confession.  Without  such  a  confession,  ad- 
mission into  the  kingdom  is  impossible.  "  Every  one 
therefore  who  shall  confess  me  before  men,  him  will 
I  also  confess  before  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven. 
But  whosoever  shall  deny  me  before  men,  him  will 
I  also  deny  before  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven  " 
(Mt.  10 :  32,  33  ;  Lk.  12 ;  8).  Given  in  almost  iden- 
tical form  in  Matthew  and  Luke,  there  can  be  little 
doubt  about  its  coming  to  us  through  the  Q  source; 
and  it  implies  that  the  custom,  which  has  prevailed 
in  the  church  from  the  very  beginning,  of  requiring 
a  public  profession  of  faith  on  the  part  of  all  candi- 
dates for  admission  into  Christian  fellowship,  rests 
on  the  authority  of  Jesus  himself.  And  hence  we 
are  not  surprised  to  find  baptism  mentioned  in  the 
great  commission  alongside  of  teaching  as  a  means 
for  the  extension  of  the  kingdom. 

It  is,  of  course,  well  known  that  the  baptismal 
formula,  contained  in  the  great  commission,  has  been 
questioned.  It  has  been  contended  that  it  did  not 
form  a  part  of  the  commission,  as  originally  given  by 
Jesus ;  and  the  contention  rests  upon  two  grounds. 
The  first  argument  against  it  is  that  Eusebius  of 
Csesarea  often  quotes  the  great  commission,  and  gen- 
erally omits,  or  stops  short  of,  the  words  which  speak 


286         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

of  baptism.  But  it  has  been  observed,  on  the  other 
side,  that,  whenever  it  suits  his  argument,  he  does 
quote  the  verse  which  contains  the  Trinitarian 
formula.  The  other  argument  against  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  formula  rests  on  the  fact  that,  wherever 
baptism  is  referred  to  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment it  is  spoken  of  as  ''  in  the  name  of  Christ,"  not 
"  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of 
the  Holy  Spirit"  (see  Acts  2:38;  8:16;  10:48; 
19  :  5  ;  Rom.  6:3;  Gal.  3  :  27).  On  the  other  side, 
however,  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  "  the  verse  is 
found  in  every  extant  Greek  MS.,  whether  uncial 
or  cursive,  and  in  every  extant  version,  which  con- 
tains this  portion  of  Matthew."  ^  It  is  exceedingly 
difficult  to  conceive  how  such  a  verse  could  have  been 
interpolated,  without  some  trace  of  a  different  read- 
ing being  found  in  some  ancient  MS.  or  version. 
Besides,  when  one  recalls  how,  in  the  two  oldest 
of  our  sources,  Jesus  is  represented  as  using  the 
names  Father  and  Son  in  juxtaposition  in  such  a 
way  as  to  imply  that  the  Son  occupied  an  altogether 
unique  relation  to  the  Father  (Mt.  11:27;  Lk. 
10:  22;  Mk.  13:  32),  and  when  one  recalls  the  way 
in  which  Jesus,  even  in  the  Synoptics,  referred  to 
the  Holy  Spirit,  the  use  of  the  Trinitarian  formula 
by  him  is  not  inconceivable.  At  any  rate,  whatever 
may  be  the  critical  conclusion  on  that  point,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  genuineness  of  the  command 
to  baptize  as  well  as  to  teach.  Otherwise  the  universal 
*  Plummer's  Commentary  on  Matthew,  p.  431. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     287 

practice  of  baptism  in  tlie  Apostolic  Church  would 
be  inexplicable. 

What  does  it  signify  ?  It  was  from  the  beginning 
the  method  by  which  men  made  their  profession  of 
faith  in  Jesus  as  Lord.  And  it  was  more  than  that. 
Whether  we  say  "  in  the  name  of  Christ,"  or  "  in 
the  name  of  the  Eather  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the 
Holy  Spirit/'  the  rite  signifies  and  seals  the  be- 
liever's incorporation  into  mystical  communion  with 
God  through  Jesus  Christ.  ''  The  divine  name  is 
often  a  reverend  sjmonym  for  the  divine  nature,  for 
God  himself;  and  therefore  baptizing  into  the  name 
of  the  Trinity  may  mean  immersing  into  the  infinite 
ocean  of  the  divine  perfection.  In  Christian  bap- 
tism the  divine  essence  is  the  element  into  which 
the  baptized  are  plunged,  and  in  which  they  are 
baptized."  ^  Surely,  that  is  its  symbolic  significance ; 
and  where  the  true  believer  thus  makes  public  pro- 
fession of  his  faith  in  Christ,  God  honours  the  pro- 
fession by  giving  him  full  and  free  admission  into 
the  kingdom. 

3)  May  we  also  include  the  Lord's  Supper  among 
the  means  for  the  propagation  of  the  kingdom? 
Luke,  in  his  account  of  the  institution  of  the  Supper, 
reports  Jesus  as  saying,  "  This  do  in  remembrance 
of  me"  (Lk.  22:19).  Paul  also  has  the  same 
words ;  and  he  adds  by  way  of  explanation :  ^^  Eor 
as  often  as  ye  eat  this  bread  and  drink  this  cup,  ye 
proclaim  the  Lord's  death  till  he  come "    (1  Cor. 

^  Plummer,  op.  cit.,  p.  433. 


S88         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

11:25,  26).  That  makes  the  Supper,  not  simply  a 
memorial  of  the  Lord's  death,  but  also  an  impressive 
method  for  its  proclamation.  But  it  is  to  be  ob- 
served that  both  Matthew  and  Mark  omit  the  words ; 
and  even  Luke,  according  to  Codex  D,  which  repre- 
sents the  Rewrought  or  Western  text,  does  not  have 
them.  The  question  has  hence  almost  inevitably 
arisen.  Did  Jesus  really  use  them?  And  did  he 
intend  to  institute  a  sacrament  which  should  be  per- 
petually observed  in  remembrance  of  him?  We,  of 
course,  do  not  know  on  what  source  the  statement 
in  1  Corinthians  11:26  rests;  but  Paul  claims  to 
have  received,  what  he  has  written  on  this  subject, 
from  the  Lord  (1  Cor.  11:23).  And  this  can  not 
mean  less  than  that  he  received  it  from  the  Lord 
through  credible  eye-witnesses.  And  we  know  some- 
thing about  his  opportunity  for  making  first-hand 
investigation ;  so  that,  even  if  he  stood  entirely  alone 
in  his  report  of  the  words,  we  might  take  it  for 
granted  that  they  represent  a  genuine  tradition, 
rather  than  that  they  are  an  invention  on  his  part. 

But  not  only  is  the  Lord's  Supper  thus  an  im- 
pressive method  for  commemorating  the  death  of 
Jesus,  and  so  of  testifying  to  the  greatness  and 
reality  of  his  dying  love ;  it  is  also  an  efficient  means 
for  edifying  the  believer.  When  Jesus  said,  '^  Take, 
eat;  this  is  my  body"  (Mt.  26:26;  Mk.  14:22; 
Lk.  22: 17),  he  can  not  well  have  meant  less  than 
that  by  so  doing  worshippers  would  enter  into  com- 
munion and  fellowship  with  him.    That  is  what  the 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  KINGDOM     289 

eating  of  the  flesh  of  the  sacrificial  victim  always 
symbolized.  It  implied  that  the  worshipper  thus 
entered  into  communion  with  God.  And  when  Jesus 
thus  offered  his  flesh  symbolically  as  food  to  be  eaten, 
he  invited  the  believer  to  vital  communion  and  fel- 
lowship with  himself.  So  that  the  Supper  is,  not 
simply  an  impressive  proclamation  of  his  death;  it 
is  also,  and  much  more,  a  means  of  grace  for  the 
inward  spiritual  edification  of  the  members  of  the 
kingdom  itself. 


XII 
THE  COJ^SUMMATION^  OF  THE  KINGDOM 

THOUGH  the  consummation  of  tlie  kingdom 
may  be  long  delayed,  it  will  come.  The 
transformation,  which  is  required  before  the 
kingdom  can  come  in  its  full  power  and  glory,  may 
still  be  exceedingly  great;  yet  it  has  begun,  and  it 
is  being  carried  forward  under  the  influence  of 
powers  whose  efficacy  we  can  not  doubt.  The  Word, 
when  sown,  is  like  a  seed  which  has  the  power  of 
life  in  itself ;  it  has  found  lodgment  in  the  lives  and 
hearts  of  men;  it  is  growing  by  means  of  a  vitality 
which  is  inherent  in  itself,  and  which  is  not  dependent 
on  any  power  on  the  outside  of  itself.  "When  the 
time  is  ripe,  it  will  bring  forth  fruit  of  itself.  There 
are  hostile  powers  at  work  now  to  choke  the  Word; 
it  will  have  to  pass  through  many  a  crisis,  in  which 
its  very  life  may  seem  to  hang  in  the  balance;  but 
God  is  the  husbandman,  who  watches  over  its  destiny ; 
and  he  is  greater  than  all.  He  will  bring  victory 
out  of  every  apparent  defeat,  and  crown  the  efforts 
of  his  people  with  complete  success.  Hence  Jesus 
could  say,  "Fear  not,  little  flock;  for  it  is  your 
Father's  good  pleasure  to  give  you  the  kingdom  " 
(Lk.  12;  32). 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM     291 

How  does  Jesus  represent  the  consiunmation  ? 
What  is  involved  in  it?  How  will  it  be  brought 
to  pass  ?  It  is  evident  that  it  will  involve  the  com- 
plete transformation  of  the  world,  so  that  the  will 
of  God  shall  be  done  on  earth  as  perfectly  as  it  is 
in  heaven.  Sin  and  evil  will  be  overcome  and  ex- 
pelled from  the  life  of  redeemed  humanity;  and 
God  will  be  everywhere  enthroned  in  the  hearts  of 
men.  And  that  will  mean  that  this  world  will  be 
transformed  into  heaven;  for  where  God  is,  there 
heaven  is.  AVhether  we  say  that  heaven  will  come 
down  and  become  permanently  established  on  earth, 
or  that  earth  will  be  lifted  up  so  as  to  become  a 
part  of  heaven,  the  result  is  the  same.  The  kingdom 
of  God  will  be  fully  realized,  and  it  will  thus  become 
the  eternal  abode  of  those  who  are  under  the  divine 
rule  (Mt  8 :  11 ;  Lk.  22 :  29,  30). 

1.    TJie  State  of  the  Christian  Dead 

Before  we  are  prepared  to  take  up  more  fully  the 
question  as  to  how  the  transformation  will  be 
brought  to  pass,  we  find  ourselves  confronted  by 
another.  If  the  consummation  will  be  thus  long  de- 
layed, as  we  have  reason  to  believe,  what  will  become 
of  those  who  meanwhile  fall  on  sleep  ?  What  is  the 
state  of  those  who  have  died  and  who  will  die?  It 
is  the  same  question  that  came  to  the  members  of 
the  church  at  Thessalonica  in  a  somewhat  modified 
form.     They  had  been  led  to  believe  that  the  con- 


292         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

summation  of  the  age  was  near  at  hand,  that  the 
Lord  would  come  during  their  lifetime;  and  when 
some  of  them  died,  the  question  was  anxiously  asked. 
What  will  become  of  these  when  the  Lord  does  come 
to  set  up  his  kingdom  ?  Paul  answered  their  inquiry 
in  1  Thessalonians  4: 13-18.  The  question  does  not 
come  to  us  in  quite  the  same  form.  And  yet  we  can 
not  help  asking,  What  is  the  state  of  our  Christian 
dead,  while  the  conflict  is  going  on  here,  and  until 
the  kingdom  shall  be  established  in  its  full  power  and 
glory?  The  question  compels  us  to  ask.  What  did 
Jesus  teach  on  the  subject  of  death  and  the  state  of 
our  Christian  dead  ? 

We  note  first  of  all  the  way  in  which  Jesus  looked 
upon  his  own  death.  At  least  six  months  before  the 
event,  he  foretold  how  '^  the  Son  of  man  must  suffer 
many  things,  and  be  rejected  by  the  elders,  and  the 
chief  priests,  and  the  scribes,  and  be  killed  "  (Mk. 
8:31).  And  he  repeated  the  prediction  at  least 
twice  after  that  (Mk.  9:31;  10:33).  But  it  is  to 
be  noted  that  with  each  prediction  of  his  death  there 
was  coupled  a  prediction  of  his  resurrection.  He 
looked  forward  to  a  victory  over  death.  However 
much  of  bitterness  he  may  have  found  in  the  cup, 
when  it  was  finally  pressed  to  his  lips,  he  never  for 
one  moment  swerved  from  the  firm  conviction 
that  he  would  pass  through  death  to  more  abundant 
life. 

And  how  he  conceived  the  life  beyond  the  grave  is 
indicated  by  what  he  said  to  the  penitent  thief  on 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM     293 

the  cross.  "  To-day  thou  shalt  be  with  me  in  Para- 
dise "  (Lk.  23:43).  It  was  but  another  way  of 
saying  that  he  would  presently  be  with  God  in  joy 
and  felicity.  Paradise  was  a  synonym  for  heaven. 
And  not  only  did  he  expect  to  be  there  himself;  but 
that  word  of  comfort  implied  that  the  penitent  thief 
would  be  there  with  him.  And  the  thief  received  the 
assurance  that  he  would  be  there  because  of  his  re- 
pentance and  faith  in  that  eleventh  hour.  He  had 
done  nothing  to  merit  such  a  blessed  termination  of 
his  career.  It  came  to  him  as  a  free  gift  of  grace 
because  of  his  prayer  of  faith;  and  that,  at  least, 
suggests  the  thought  that  such  will  be  the  state  of 
all  who  die  in  the  faith. 

Another  hint  of  his  conception  of  death  we  find 
in  the  word  spoken  on  the  occasion  of  the  raising 
of  Jairus'  daughter.  When  he  came  to  the  house, 
he  found  the  hired  mourners  weeping  and  wailing 
and  making  a  great  tumult.  Quietly  he  put  them 
all  forth,  saying,  "Why  make  ye  a  tumult,  and 
weep?  the  child  is  not  dead,  but  sleepeth''  (Mk. 
5 :  39).  It  was  a  figure  of  speech,  borrowed  from  the 
Old  Testament,  by  which  he  indicated  what,  in  his 
view,  death  means  for  those  who  die  in  him.  It 
does  not  imply  that  the  dead  are  in  a  state  of  uncon- 
sciousness, but  rather  that  death  does  for  them  what 
sleep  does  for  the  natural  man.  As  in  sleep  we  rest 
from  our  labours;  so  do  the  pious  dead  rest  from 
theirs.  Furthermore,  as  sleep  is  nature's  sweet  re- 
storer, so  is  death.     As  in  sleep  the  energies,  which 


294j        the  supreme  REVELATION 

have  been  wasted  and  dissipated  by  the  labours  of 
the  day,  are  gathered  up  again  and  our  bodies  pre- 
pared for  the  occupations  of  a  new  day;  so  in  death 
are  the  energies,  which  have  been  wasted  and  dis- 
sipated by  the  activities  of  this  life,  gathered  up 
again,  and  the  person  prepared  for  the  awakening  of 
a  new  and  more  glorious  day. 

In  the  parable  of  the  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus,  we 
have  two  men,  whose  state  after  death  is  represented 
as  diametrically  opposite.  The  rich  man,  who  in 
this  life  had  an  abundance  of  good  things,  who  had 
great  opportunities  for  doing  good  to  his  fellow-men, 
but  who  yet  lived  in  selfish  luxury,  is  represented 
as  being  in  torments.  His  experience  suggests  that 
the  law  of  retribution  extends  also  to  the  invisible 
world  beyond  the  grave.  Lazarus,  on  the  contrary, 
whose  condition  in  this  life  was  the  polar  opposite, 
who  had  nothing  but  misery  and  pain,  but  whose 
trust,  as  the  name  implies,  was  in  God,  is  seen  to 
be  in  Abraham's  bosom,  which  was  but  another  name 
for  heaven.  The  parable  implies  that  death  does 
not  end  all,  and  that  the  state  of  the  dead  depends 
on  the  character  formed  in  this  life. 

2.    The  Resurrection 

The  Stat©  of  the  Christian  dead  looks  forward  to 
a  glorious  awakening.  ISTot  only  did  the  early  church 
teach  the  doctrine  of  a  resurrection;  but  we  find  it 
in  the  teaching  of  Jesus. 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM     295 

In  trying  to  ascertain  what  Jesus  thought  on  this 
subject,  it  is  convenient  again  to  begin  with  what 
he  said  of  his  own  resurrection.  As  we  saw  above, 
he  not  only  foretold  his  own  death,  but  his  resurrec- 
tion as  well.  In  fact  the  two  predictions  are  always 
connected.  Jesus  felt  in  himself  the  certainty  of 
victory  over  death  and  the  grave.  "  And  after  three 
days  he  shall  rise  again"  (Mk.  8:31;  9:31; 
10:34). 

It  is  to  be  observed,  however,  that  Jesus  stops 
with  the  prediction  that  he  shall  rise  again.  He 
indulges  in  no  speculations  as  to  the  manner  of  his 
resurrection.  He  has  no  theories  as  to  the  form  of 
it.  Just  as  the  New  Testament  writers  speak  only 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  never  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  flesh,  not  even  of  the  resurrection 
of  the  body,  so  it  is  with  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  He 
simply  says,  ^^  he  shall  rise  again."  It  is  true  that, 
according  to  Luke,  he  spoke  of  his  having  flesh  and 
bones,  when  he  showed  himself  to  the  disciples  on 
the  evening  of  the  resurrection.  When  then  they 
were  affrighted  and  imagined  that  they  beheld  a 
spirit,  he  told  them  to  handle  him  and  see ;  '^  for  a 
spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones  as  ye  see  me  having  " 
(Lk.  24:  39).  We  may  doubtless  say  that,  inasmuch 
as  a  body  is  implied  in  the  idea  of  our  true  and  full 
humanity,  so  the  body  in  some  form  must  share 
in  the  victory  over  death ;  and  we  may  doubtless  say 
still  further  that,  such  being  the  case,  the  bodily 
resurrection  must  in  some  form  be  included  in  our 


£96        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

Lord's  prediction.  Yet  it  is  to  be  observed,  Jesus 
does  not  put  the  emphasis  on  that;  the  main  idea, 
which  is  found  in  his  teaching  on  the  subject,  is  the 
certainty  of  his  victory  over  death.  He  knew  that 
though  he  should  die,  yet  would  he  live  again; 
and  what  he  wished  to  assure  the  disciples  of 
was  the  certainty  of  his  triumph  over  death  and  the 
grave. 

In  one  passage  especially  Jesus  teaches  the  cer- 
tainty of  the  resurrection.  When  the  Sadducees 
came  to  him  on  the  Tuesday  of  his  last  week,  he 
declared  his  conviction  on  the  subject  in  unmistaka- 
ble terms.  They  denied  the  resurrection,  and  they 
tried  to  reduce  the  doctrine  to  absurdity  by  their 
question  as  to  the  woman  who,  under  the  law  of 
levirate  marriage,  had  been  married  to  seven  brothers 
in  succession.  After  pointing  out  their  error  with 
reference  to  the  possibility  of  marriage  in  the  state 
after  the  resurrection,  he  went  on  to  give  them  proof 
of  the  doctrine  which  they  had  rejected.  "  But  as 
touching  the  dead,  that  they  are  raised ;  have  ye  not 
read  in  the  book  of  Moses,  in  the  place  concerning 
the  Bush,  how  God  spake  unto  him,  saying,  I  am 
the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the 
God  of  Jacob  ?  He  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead,  but 
of  the  living"  (Mk.  12:26-27).  That  is  often 
taken  to  mean  that,  since  God  is  the  God  of  Abraham 
and  Isaac  and  Jacob,  they  must  be  living,  because 
he  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead,  but  of  the  living.  That, 
however,  hardly  expresses  the  thought  of  Jesus.     It 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM     297 

is  rather  this.  Since  the  Patriarchs  had  come  to 
stand  in  such  a  relation  to  God  that  he  could  be  called 
their  God,  they  must  have  been  like  him  in  right- 
eousness and  life,  so  that  they  had  been  admitted 
into  life  communion  with  him.  They  were  more 
than  merely  material  beings.  They  were  God's  kin, 
and  as  such  shared  in  his  life.  But  that  very  life 
is  eternal  life ;  so  that  their  immortality  was  assured 
in  their  very  relation  to  him. 


3.    TTie  Second  Coming 

The  consummation  of  the  kingdom  is  in  the  N'ew 
Testament  associated  with  the  coming  of  the  Lord 
in  glory.  E'o  sooner  had  the  first  Christians  recov- 
ered from  their  unspeakable  dismay  at  the  crucifixion 
than  they  began  to  look  forward  to  the  return  of  the 
Lord  to  set  up  his  kingdom.  "  Ye  men  of  Galilee, 
why  stand  ye  looking  into  heaven  ?  this  Jesus,  which 
was  received  up  from  you  into  heaven,  shall  so  come 
in  like  manner  as  ye  beheld  him  going  into  heaven  " 
(Acts  1 :  11).  "  For  the  Lord  himself  shall  descend 
from  heaven,  with  a  shout,  with  the  voice  of  the 
archangel,  and  with  the  trump  of  God  "  (1  Thess. 
4: 16).  "  Looking  for  the  blessed  hope  and  appear- 
ing of  our  great  God  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ" 
(Titus  2: 13).  There  can  be  no  question  about  the 
fact  that  the  first  Christians  all  entertained  this  hope. 

N'ow,  this  universal  expectation  can  be  accounted 
for  only  on  the  supposition  of  a  distinct  prediction 


mS        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

on  the  part  of  the  Lord  Jesus  himself.  Other 
aspects  of  their  belief  in  the  second  coming  may  be 
accounted  for  on  the  basis  of  the  current  Messianic 
expectation ;  but  their  abiding  faith  in  the  fact  itself 
can  not.  There  was  nothing  in  Jewish  literature  nor 
in  the  current  Messianic  expectation  concerning  a 
second  coming  of  the  Messiah.  Where  else  could  it 
have  come  from  but  from  Jesus  himself  ?  And  when 
w^e  turn  to  his  reported  sayings,  we  find  abundant 
evidence  that  he  himself  looked  forward  to  his  return 
in  glory.  In  fact  that  expectation  is  closely  linked 
with  the  certainty  of  his  death.  E'o  sooner  had  he 
told  the  disciples  of  the  necessity  of  his  going  up  to 
Jerusalem  to  suffer  and  die,  and  told  them  also  of 
the  necessity  of  their  bearing  the  cross  after  him, 
than  he  told  them  of  his  coming  again  in  glory. 
''  For  whosoever  shall  be  ashamed  of  me  and  of  my 
words  in  this  adulterous  and  sinful  generation,  the 
Son  of  man  also  shall  be  ashamed  of  him,  when  he 
Cometh  in  the  glory  of  his  Father  with  the  holy 
angels"  (Mk.  8:38;  see  also  Mt.  24:27;  Lk. 
12:40;  Mk.  14:62). 

We  should  doubtless  distinguish  between  the  fact 
of  this  second  coming  and  the  form  of  it.  With 
reference  to  the  former,  the  teaching  of  Jesus  leaves 
no  room  for  doubt ;  with  reference  to  the  latter  we 
should  recognize  that  there  is  a  great  deal  of  uncer- 
tainty. But  even  on  this  side  there  are  a  few  things 
which  the  teaching  of  Jesus  has  made  clear.  It  will 
be  a  return  in  glory.     It  is  set  in  contrast  with  the 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM     299 

first  coining,  which  was  in  humiliation,  and  which 
culminated  in  suffering,  shame,  and  death.  This  con- 
trast is  implied  in  what  Jesus  said  to  the  high  priest, 
when  he  stood  before  him  in  his  trial.  He  was  then 
under  the  very  shadow  of  the  cross.  But  when  Cai- 
aphas  asked  him,  ^^  Art  thou  the  Christ,  the  Son  of 
the  Blessed ?  "  he  answered,  "I  am :  and  ye  shall 
see  the  Son  of  man  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  power, 
and  coming  with  the  clouds  of  heaven''  (Mk. 
14:  62).  And  there  is  a  second  fact  which  is  stated 
with  equal  certainty.  His  coming  will  be  as  Judge 
of  the  world.  "  But  when  the  Son  of  man  shall  come 
in  his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then 
shall  he  sit  on  the  throne  of  his  glory :  and  before  him 
shall  be  gathered  all  nations:  and  he  shall  separate 
them  one  from  another,  as  the  shepherd  separateth 
the  sheep  from  the  goats :  and  he  shall  set  the  sheep  on 
his  right  hand,  but  the  goats  on  the  left''  (Mt. 
25:31-33). 

Much  of  the  language,  used  in  describing  this  com- 
ing in  glory,  is  no  doubt  highly  figurative  and  sym- 
bolical. His  "  coming  on  the  clouds  of  heaven  "  is 
metaphorical  just  as  "  the  sitting  at  the  right  hand 
of  power "  is.  As  Professor  Beyschlag  puts  it,  ^'  it 
reminds  us  of  the  repeated  Old  Testament  delinea- 
tions of  Jehovah  riding  on  the  storm-cloud  of  judg- 
ment (Ps.  28 :  8,  f. ;  50 :  3  ;  97 :  2),  still  more  of  the 
Son  of  man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  (Dan. 
7 :  13).  When  the  event  is  described  as  taking  place 
with  the  accompaniment  of  great  power  and  glory. 


SOO        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

the  glorj  of  the  Father  with  the  holy  angels,  the 
language  is  not  to  be  taken  literally,  but  as  a  figura- 
tive and  pictorial  representation  of  victory  and  tri- 
umph. It  means  the  complete  victory  of  the  Son 
of  man,  the  final  triumph  of  his  kingdom  over  all 
his  enemies." 

Evidently  this  coming  in  glory  is  not  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  single  isolated  event  in  history.  It  is 
many-sided,  and  may  be  viewed  from  several  dif- 
ferent points  of  view. 

1)  In  the  last  chapter  we  had  occasion  to  speak 
of  the  apocalyptic  discourse  in  the  thirteenth  chapter 
of  Mark.  We  saw  that,  according  to  Mark,  the  entire 
discourse  may  be  easily  referred  to  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem ;  and  we  expressed  the  conviction  that  that 
is  all  that  it  meant  in  the  first  place.  But  it  became 
linked  very  early  with  the  second  coming  of  Christ 
at  the  end  of  the  world;  and,  in  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  Matthew,  it  is  made  to  refer  to  both  events. 
ITow,  the  probable  explanation  is  that  Christ  did 
come  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  He  came  to 
the  disciples  in  the  resurrection,  on  the  day  of  Pente- 
cost, in  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  again 
in  the  awful  judgment  which  was  visited  on  Jeru- 
salem. And  so  he  is  ever  coming  in  all  the  great 
crises  of  history,  both  in  the  life  of  individuals  and 
of  nations. 

And  a  hint  of  this  may  be  found  in  the  word 
which  is  used  in  the  Greek.  It  has  been  translit- 
erated in  paroiisia  {napovaia).   But  in  the  Greek  it 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM     301 

means  presence,  rather  than  coming;  and  it  refers  to 
any  of  the  various  forms  in  which  Christ  has  been 
present  with  his  people  since  his  ascension  into 
heaven. 

2)  This  at  once  suggests  a  second  aspect  under 
which  that  coming  or  presence  may  be  viewed.  Christ 
returned  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  in  the  outpouring  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  He  is  present  by  his  Spirit,  and 
he  comes  in  every  manifestation  of  the  Spirit,  whether 
in  the  form  of  power  or  of  sanctification.  As  is  well 
known,  the  Fourth  Gospel  lays  emphasis  on  this  side 
of  the  truth.  "  I  will  not  leave  you  orphans :  I 
come  unto  you  " ;  and  what  kind  of  coming  Jesus 
had  in  mind  is  indicated  by  the  connection  in  which 
the  promise  stands.  He  had  just  referred  to  the 
coming  of  the  Comforter.  ''  And  I  will  pray  the 
Father,  and  he  shall  give  you  another  Comforter,  that 
he  may  abide  with  you  for  ever,  even  the  Spirit  of 
truth:  whom  the  world  can  not  receive;  for  it  be- 
holdeth  him  not,  neither  knoweth  him :  ye  know  him : 
for  he  abideth  with  you,  and  shall  be  in  you.  I  will 
not  leave  you  orphans ;  I  come  unto  you "  ( Jn. 
14:16-18).  And  there  is,  at  least,  nothing  in  the 
Synoptic  teaching  to  contradict  this  view.  Jesus  is 
present,  and  he  comes  in  ever  more  glorious  forms, 
in  every  spiritual  triumph  of  his  people. 

3)  But  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  explain  all  the 
references  to  the  second  coming  of  the  Lord  in  either 
of  these  ways,  as  if  there  were  no  event  to  be  looked 
for,  in  which  he  will  come  in  full  and  final  triumph. 


30^         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

History  is  a  unity ;  it  is  moving  forward  to  a  definite 
goal — the  final  triumph  of  the  kingdom  of  God  over 
all  the  powers  of  sin  and  evil.  The  reference  in  Mat- 
thew 25  :  31-33  can  not  well  be  to  anything  else.  His- 
tory is  now  moving  forward  through  a  succession  of 
conflicts  and  triumphs.  As  we  saw  in  the  last  chapter, 
it  is  the  way  in  which  the  kingdom  is  developing. 
But  every  crisis  in  the  onward  development  of  the 
kingdom  is  only  an  adumbration  of  a  final  crisis,  in 
which  the  right  shall  be  made  to  triumph  finally  and 
forever.  And  in  that  final  triumph,  Jesus  will  be 
revealed  in  his  full  splendour  and  glory.  It  will  be 
his  glorious  revelation  from  heaven.  The  emphasis 
is  on  the  finality  of  the  crisis  which  that  revelation 
introduces,  and  on  the  finality  of  the  issues  which  it 
brings  to  pass.  "  Then  shall  the  King  say  unto  them 
on  the  right  hand.  Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father, 
inherit  the  kingdom  prepared  for  you  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world.  .  .  .  Then  shall  he  say  also 
unto  them  on  his  left.  Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed, 
into  the  eternal  fire  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his 
angels.  .  .  .  And  these  shall  go  away  into  eternal 
punishment :  but  the  righteous  into  eternal  life  "  (Mt. 
25:  34-46).  Hence  while  there  is  a  sense  in  which 
his  coming  is  continuous,  as  was  intimated  by  Jesus 
himself  before  the  high  priest  (Mt.  26 :  64),  that  does 
not  exhaust  the  subject.  There  will  be  a  final  coming, 
which  will  involve  his  complete  triumph  over  his 
enemies,  and  which  will  bring  about  his  perfect  reve- 
lation in  the  glory  of  the  Father. 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM    303 

4.    The  Final  Judgment 

With  this  second  coming  of  the  Lord,  there  is  asso- 
ciated a  final  judgment  of  the  nations  of  the  world. 
The  idea,  as  well  as  the  association,  may  have  been 
derived  originally  from  the  Old  Testament,  where  the 
coming  of  the  Messiah  is  spoken  of  in  connection 
with  the  judgment  (Zeph.  1:14-16).  Certainly, 
Jesus  often  referred  to  "  the  day  of  judgment." 
"  Verily,  I  say  unto  you,  It  shall  be  more  tolerable 
for  the  land  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  in  the  day  of 
judgment  than  for  that  city  "  (Mt.  10 :  15),  ''  And 
I  say  unto  you,  that  every  idle  word  that  men  shall 
speak,  they  shall  give  an  account  thereof  in  the  day 
of  judgment''  (Mt.  12:36). 

Inasmuch  as  Jesus  speaks  of  a  '^  day  of  judg- 
ment," we  have  been  accustomed  to  think  of  the  judg- 
ment as  an  event.  In  accordance  with  the  pictorial 
representation,  which  is  given  in  Matthew  25  :  30-46, 
we  are  apt  to  think  of  it  as  if  it  were  an  isolated 
event,  without  direct  connection  with  what  goes  be- 
fore and  with  what  follows  after.  This,  however, 
is  a  mistake.  It  is  rather  a  process  unfolding 
through  successive  crises,  and  reaching  its  culmina- 
tion in  a  final  crisis.  It  is,  in  fact,  the  last  great 
crisis  of  history,  that  towards  which  all  the  other 
crises  have  been  pointing,  and  in  which  they  will 
all  reach  their  solution.  The  truth  of  all  this  we 
may  be  able  to  appreciate,  if  we  carefully  study  that 


304.        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

pictorial  judgment  programme,  which  is  given  in  the 
twenty-fifth  chapter  of  Matthew. 

A  careful  study  of  this  judgment  programme  re- 
veals three  things : 

1)  The  judgment  itself  brings  with  it  a  revela- 
tion, a  revelation  of  the  characters  of  men,  just  as 
the  parousia  brings  with  it  a  revelation  of  Jesus 
Christ.  The  Son  of  man  is  represented  as  separat- 
ing between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked,  as  a  shep- 
herd separates  between  the  sheep  and  the  goats  (Mt. 
25:32,  33).  The  righteous  receive  the  joyful  wel- 
come to  the  Judge^s  right  hand,  while  the  wicked 
are  sent  away  into  misery  and  anguish  on  the  left 
The  Judge  himself  sees  what  the  character  of  each 
one  in  his  presence  is ;  and  more  than  that.  He  like- 
wise makes  each  one  to  stand  out  in  the  nakedness 
of  his  true  character  before  an  assembled  universe. 
Now,  in  the  numerous  crises  which  occur  in  history, 
men  may  succeed  in  hiding  their  real  characters 
from  their  fellows ;  and  they  may  succeed  in  occupy- 
ing a  seat  among  the  righteous,  when  in  reality  all 
their  goodness  is  but  hypocritical  sham.  But  in  that 
great  day,  such  a  thing  will  be  impossible.  Every 
one  will  then  stand  revealed,  as  he  is. 

2)  With  this  revelation  of  the  true  character  of 
men,  there  will  follow  their  separation  the  one  from 
the  other.  The  righteous  will  stand  on  the  Judge's 
right  hand,  the  wicked  on  his  left.  There  will  be  an 
outward  separation  corresponding  to  the  inward  sep- 
aration, which  has  long  been  taking  place.     This  is 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM     305 

in  reality  the  central  fact  in  the  entire  transaction. 
All  else  that  goes  before  is  but  a  preparation  for  it ; 
and  all  that  follows  after  is  but  the  result  flowing 
from  it. 

It  is  when  we  look  at  the  judgment  from  this  point 
of  view  that  we  can  realize  how  it  is  first  of  all  a 
process,  before  it  can  be  an  event.  Men  and  na- 
tions are  preparing  themselves  for  the  great  day  by 
the  attitude  which  they  assume  with  reference  to 
the  great  conflict  between  right  and  wrong.  With 
reference  to  that  conflict,  the  lines  are  being  con- 
tinually drawn.  Men  are  in  reality  passing  to  the 
right  hand  or  to  the  left  of  the  Judge  by  the  attitude 
which  they  are  assuming  with  reference  to  the  ques- 
tions of  right  and  wrong  which  are  coming  before 
them  every  day  of  their  lives.  And  the  same  is  true 
of  nations.  In  accordance  with  the  manner  in  which 
they  are  dealing  with  the  great  problems  of  right 
and  wrong,  as  these  come  up  in  the  great  moral, 
social,  and  industrial  crises  of  their  history,  they 
too  are  shaping  their  destiny  in  the  last  great  day. 

It  is  interesting,  in  this  connection,  to  recall  the 
word  used  in  our  Greek  New  Testament  for  judg- 
ment. It  is  Hpi(ji?  and  has  been  bodily  transferred 
into  English  in  our  word  crisis.  It  is  derived  from 
xpivGD,  which  means  to  separate,  to  put  asunder,  to 
select,  to  choose.  And  just  as  every  crisis  is  a  sep- 
arating between  hostile  forces,  which  have  been  op- 
posed to  each  other  and  contending  with  each  other; 
so  it  is  with  the  final  crisis,  the  judgment.     In  it 


306        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

the  kingdom  of  light  and  the  powers  of  darkness, 
which  have  all  along  through  history  been  engaged 
in  a  struggle  for  the  mastery,  will  come  to  their  last 
death  grapple;  and  through  the  almighty  power  of 
God,  the  kingdom  of  light  will  come  to  its  full,  its 
final,  and  its  everlasting  victory. 

3)  Flowing  from  tJiis  victory  and  this  separa- 
tion there  will  follow  the  rewarding  of  each  one 
according  to  the  deeds  done  in  the  body.  Those  who 
stand  on  the  right  hand  will  then  receive  the  welcome 
plaudit,  "  Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the 
kingdom  prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of 
the  world"  (Mt.  25:34);  while  those  on  the  left 
will  hear  the  terrible  sentence,  "  Depart  from  me,  ye 
cursed,  into  the  eternal  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil 
and  his  angels  "  (Mt.  25  :  41). 

It  should  be  observed  that,  when  stripped  of  its 
pictorial  imagery,  this  part  of  the  representation  is 
but  a  consequence  of  what  has  gone  before.  For  the 
righteous  to  be  finally  separated  from  sin  and  evil  is 
to  be  joined  forever  with  that  which  is  good;  and 
that  means  happiness  and  bliss  forevermore.  On 
the  other  hand,  for  the  wicked  to  be  finally  separated 
from  the  righteous  and  from  all  that  makes  for  right- 
eousness, is  to  be  separated  from  all  that  can  give 
permanent  satisfaction  and  bliss;  and  that  is  to  be 
wretched  and  ruined  forever.  The  rewards,  which 
we  are  so  apt  to  think  the  chief  thing  in  the  great 
judgment  day,  are  in  reality  only  the  consequence 
of  that  which  is  deeper  and  more  important. 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM     307 

This  pictorial  representation  also  suggests  tlie  prin- 
ciple, in  accordance  with  which  the  judgment  is  to 
be  executed.  The  judgment  is  made  to  turn  on  deeds, 
and  these  the  smaller  deeds  of  our  ordinary  every- 
day life.  "  For  I  was  an  hungered,  and  ye  gave  me 
meat :  I  was  thirsty,  and  ye  gave  me  drink :  I  was  a 
stranger,  and  ye  took  me  in:  naked,  and  ye  clothed 
me :  I  was  sick,  and  ye  visited  me :  I  was  in  prison, 
and  ye  came  unto  me"  (Mt.  25:35,  36).  And  so 
on  the  other  side:  the  lack  of  such  commonplace 
services  is  given  as  the  reason  for  the  condemnation 
of  the  wicked. 

The  representation  has  given  rise  to  no  small 
amount  of  perplexity.  Is  salvation  after  all  by 
works,  and  not  by  faith  ?  The  question  is  irrelevant. 
The  question  here  is  not,  how  are  we  saved?  It  is 
rather  as  to  the  principle  on  which  the  judgment 
turns.  And  that  undoubtedly  is  works.  We  shall 
be  judged  by  what  we  are,  by  our  character.  If  that 
is  righteous,  we  shall  have  our  place  at  the  Judge's 
right;  if  that  is  sinful,  we  shall  stand  on  his  left. 
And  character  is  formed  by  deeds.  Our  faith  helps 
us  to  love  and  obey;  but  unless  it  produces  these 
fruits,  it  is  dead.  It  is  eflScacious  only  as  it  helps 
us  to  become  good  and  righteous ;  and  it  is  only  when 
we  are  righteous  that  we  are  able  to  stand  at  God's 
right  hand. 

Once  more,  it  is  the  little  deeds  of  our  daily  life 
that  are  represented  as  deciding  our  destiny  in  the 
great  day.     ^ot  one  word  is  said  about  the  great 


SOS        THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

and  heroic  deeds  of  life.  It  is  the  giving  of  a  crust 
of  bread  to  a  wayfaring  man,  the  giving  of  a  cup 
of  cold  water  to  the  thirsty,  visiting  the  sick,  and 
comforting  those  who  are  in  prison.  The  reason  is 
not  hard  to  find.  Opportunity  for  doing  great  and 
heroic  deeds  come  to  very  few;  and  when  it  does 
come,  we  are  seldom  really  ourselves.  There  is  al- 
ways that  in  a  great  occasion  which  has  a  tendency 
to  lift  a  man  out  of  himself,  and  what  he  does  under 
such  circumstances  is  never  quite  his  own.  He  is 
apt  to  be  swept  along  in  spite  of  himself; 
so  that  it  is  really  easier  to  do  right  under  such 
circumstances  than  it  is  when  we  are  alone, 
and  when  we  feel  the  drag  of  misery  and  grime  on 
our  spirits.  It  is  the  little  things,  which  come  to 
us  every  day,  over  and  over  again,  and  which  we  do 
without  thinking  much  about  them,  that  test  what 
we  really  are.  Do  we  meet  these  little  things  in  the 
spirit  of  sweetness  and  love?  That  tells  what  we 
are.  Hence  it  is  such  things  that  determine  our  final 
destiny  in  the  great  day. 

5.    The  Consummation 

This  separation  of  the  final  judgment  will  be  the 
ushering  in  of  the  consummation  of  the  kingdom. 
The  kingdom  of  God  will  then  be  fully  realized. 
Under  whatever  view  it  may  be  considered,  its  ideal 
will  then  be  attained. 

1)    Those   at  the  Judge's   right  hand  will  then 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM     309 

have  realized  God's  rule  perfectly.  They  will  be 
righteous,  and  there  will  be  no  unrighteousness  left 
in  them.  God's  will  will  be  done  by  them  as  per- 
fectly on  the  earth,  as  it  is  done  in  heaven.  In 
fact,  earth  will  have  been  transformed  into  heaven. 
Whether  we  say,  in  accordance  with  the  rich  imagery 
of  the  book  of  Eevelatidn  (Eev.  21:10),  that  the 
"New  Jerusalem  will  then  have  come  down  from  God 
out  of  heaven;  or  whether  we  say,  with  the  equally 
rich  imagery  of  St.  Paul  (1  Thess.  4:17),  that  all 
who  then  remain  on  earth  shall  be  caught  up  together 
with  those  who  have  gone  before,  to  meet  the  Lord 
in  the  air,  the  result  will  be  the  same.  The  re- 
deemed will  have  become  so  like  their  elder  Brother 
that  they  will  have  become  perfect  even  as  their 
Father  in  heaven  is  perfect  (Mt.  5  :  48). 

2)  Then,  too,  those  under  the  divine  rule  will 
have  realized  to  the  full  the  blessings,  which  the 
kingdom  has  in  store  for  all  who  love  and  obey  God. 
Especially  will  they  then  attain  unto  the  beatific 
vision;  for  purified  from  all  sin  and  evil,  renewed 
and  transformed  in  their  whole  inner  life,  they  will 
see  God.  They  will  be  seated  with  Jesus  upon  his 
throne  of  glory,  sharing  in  his  dominion  and  power 
(Mt.  19:28). 

3)  Once  more,  those  under  the  divine  rule  will 
then  attain  unto  a  celestial  commonwealth,  in  which 
they  shall  enjoy  communion  and  fellowship  with  all 
God's  saints,  and  with  it  the  common  possession  of 
eternal  life  and  all  its  rich  gifts.     Whether  there 


310         THE  SUPREME  REVELATION 

will  be  such  a  thing  as  an  organized  society,  with  its 
offices,  its  functions,  and  its  ministries,  its  citizens 
will  be  bound  together  by  that  perfect  bond,  which 
will  make  all  external  organization  unnecessary  and 
obsolete;  for  each  one  w411  then  do  unto  others  abso- 
lutely as  he  would  have  them  do  unto  him.  External 
laws  will  have  passed  away  and  been  forgotten,  be- 
cause every  man  will  have  the  perfect  law  written 
upon  his  heart. 

But  how  about  those  whom  the  separation  of  that 
great  day  will  have  placed  on  the  Judge's  left  hand  ? 
One  would  fain  wish  that  he  might  include  them  also 
in  the  company  of  those  who  are  thus  caught  up 
to  this  consummation  of  happiness  and  bliss.  But 
the  teaching  of  Jesus  speaks  of  a  separation  which 
is  final,  and  which  seems  to  leave  them  on  the  outside. 

We  need  to  recall  here  that  Jesus  speaks  of  an 
unpardonable  sin;  and  those  who  commit  that  sin 
become  guilty  of  eternal  sin.  Theoretically,  taking 
human  nature  as  it  is,  with  the  tendency  of  char- 
acter both  good  and  bad  toward  fixedness,  no  one 
can  deny  the  possibility  of  the  sinful  man  attaining 
that  bad  eminence.  And  Jesus  seems  to  have  had 
more  than  simply  the  possibility  in  mind.  He  warns 
the  Pharisees,  as  if  they  stood  perilously  near  the 
fatal  precipice  (Mk.  3:28-30).  And  this  but  ac- 
cords with  those  parabolic  representations  which 
speak  of  the  final  separation.  "  As  therefore  the 
tares  are  gathered  up  and  burned  with  fire ;  so  shall 


CONSUMMATION  OF  THE  KINGDOM     311 

it  be  in  the  end  of  the  world.  The  Son  of  man  shall 
send  forth  his  angels,  and  they  shall  gather  out  of 
his  kingdom  all  things  that  cause  stumbling,  and 
them  that  do  iniquity,  and  shall  cast  them  into  the 
furnace  of  fire :  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing 
of  teeth"  (Mt.  13:40-43). 


PRINTED  nr  THE    UNITED  STATES   OF   AMERICA 


INDEX 


Allen,  W.  C,  Archdeacon,  45, 
47,  173 

Almsgiving,  248 
Asceticism,  255 

Baptism,  285 

Beyschlag,     Prof.     Willibald, 

107,  299 
Blessedness,  True,  230 
Bousset,  Prof.  W.,  183 
Bruce,  Prof.  A.  B.,  71,  112 
Burkitt,  Prof.  F.  C,  59 

Censoriousness,   258. 
Character,  The,  of  the  Citizen 

Kingdom,  217 
Chazzan,  The,  38,  39 
Children,  Jesus'  Estimate  of, 

114 
Church,  Establishing,  209 

Meaning  of  the,  180 
Citizen  of  the  Kingdom  in  Re- 
lation to  the  World,  234 
Citizens  of  the  Kingdom,  The, 

215 
Clean  and  Unclean,  67 
Correcting    Misapprehensions, 

189 
Coming,  The  Second,  297 

A  Process,  301 
.  An  Event,  302 
Commandment,    The    Second, 

257 
Conception  of  God,  The,  85 
Consciousness,  The  filial,  167 

The  Messianic,  178 
Consummation,  The,  308 
Continuity   Between   the   Old 

and  the  New,  240 
Crises,  Development  Through, 

273 


Dalman,  Prof.  Gustaf,  173 
David,  The  Son  of,  181,  182 
Dead,  State  of  the  Christian, 

291 
Death    of    Jesus    a    Ransom, 

The,  203 
Death,     The     Sacrificial,     of 

Jesus,   199 
Depravity,  The  depth  of  the, 
121 

Total,  122 
Despairing  of  No  Man,  125 
Development  of  the  Kingdom, 

The,  266 

Through  Crises,  273 
Divorce,  68,  261 
Doubly  Attested  Sayings,  The, 
57 

Enoch,  The  Book  of,  83 
Entering  the  Kingdom,  223 
Equation,  The  Personal,  49 
Estimate  of  Man,  The,  112 
Eternal  Life,  152 
Eusebius,  41,  44 
Evil  and  Lost,  118 
Evil,  The  Meaning  of,  118 

Faith,  227 
Family,  The,  260 
Fasting,  254 

Fatherhood  of  God,  The,  95 
Father,  What  is  Meant  by,  89 
Filial  Consciousness,  The,  167 
Forgiveness  of  Sins,  The,  152 
Forgiving  Sins,  193 
Fulfilment  of  the  Law  and  the 

Prophets,  77 
Fulfilment,    What    is    Meant 

by,  241 


313 


314« 


INDEX 


God,  as  Father,  87 
as  King,  87 

Attitude  Towards  Sin, 
98 

Conception  of,  85 
Extent    of    Fatherhood, 
94 

Fatherhood  of,  95 
Father  of  All    Men,    94 
Kingdom  of,  85,  136 
Meaning  of  Wrath,  102 
Names   Used    to    Desig- 
nate, 87 

Presence  of,  104 
Social  Distinctions   in, 
96 

Sons  of,  129 
The  Son  of,  169 
The  Wrath  of,  98 
Gore,  Bishop  Charles,  216,  234 
Gould,  Dr.  Ezra  P.,  277,  278 
Growth,  The  Law  of,  267 

Harnack,  Prof.  A.,  172,  175, 

210 
Heart,  Meaning  of  the,  124 
Holtzmann,  Dr.  H.  J.,  149 
Hort,    Dr.    Fenton    John   An- 
thony, 143,  145 
Human   Life,   The   Value  of, 
113 

Influence  of  Jesus,  15 
Paul,  25 

Jesus  and  the  Old  Testament, 
61 

as  Judge,  188 

Attitude  Towards  Sin- 
ners, 116 

Care  for  the  Poor,  115 

Conscious  Superiority, 
75 

Doubly  Attested  Say- 
ings of,  57 

Estimate  of  Children, 
114 

Estimate  of  the   Value 

of  the  Old  Testament,  64 


Jesus,  Filial  Consciousness  of, 
167 

Holy  Life  of,  196 
Influence  of,  15 

Influence  of,  that  of  a 
Teacher,  17 

Influenced  by  Legalistic 
Tendency,  82 

Influenced  by  Prophetic 
Ideal,  83 

Ipsissima  Verha  of,  54 

Knowledge  of  God,  174 

Lordship  of,  183 

Messianic  Consciousness 
of,  178 

Necessity  of  the  Death 
of,  200 

Optimism  of,  125 

Perfect  Obedience  of, 
175 

Pre-existence  of,  176 

Present-day  Appeals  to, 
24 

Relation  to  Contempo- 
rary Jewish  Thought, 
81 

Son  of  God,  The,  169 

Use  of  the  Old   Testa- 
ment, 61 
Judgment,  The  Final,  303 

A  Revelation  of  Char- 
acter, 304 

A  Rewarding  of    Each, 

306 

A  Separation,  304 

Kautzsch,  Prof.  Emil.  65,  165 
King,  The  Coming  of  the,  164 
Kingdom  of  God,  The,  85,  136 
A  Blessed  Hope,  160 
A  Celestial  Realm,  145 
A  Divine  Rule,  144 
A  Gift,  149 

A  Present  Possession, 
156 

A    Spiritual    Common- 
wealth, 147 
A  Task,  153 
Development  of,  266 


INDEX 


315 


Kingdom    of    God,    Entering 
the,  223 

Old  Testament  Basis  of, 
137 

The  Founder  of,  164 
The  Founding  of,  189 
The  Life  of,  239 
The  Meaning  of,  143 
The  Name,  141 
The  Nature  of,  149 

Law  of  Growth,  The,  267 
of  Murder,  The,  75,  243 
of  Retaliation,   The,    68, 

81 
of  the  Oath,  The,  244 
Legislation,   Three  Kinds   of, 
66 

Imperfect,  67 
Misunderstood,  69 
with      Symbolic      Value 
Only,  66 
Life  of  the  Kingdom,  The,  239 
Logia  of  Matthew,  The,  43,  47 
Lordship  of  Jesus,  183 
Lord's   Supper,  287 
Lost,  Meaning  of,  120 

Man,  The  Estimate  of,  112 

Mark,  as  a  Source,  36,  41 

Marriage,  260 

McGiffert,  Prof.  A.  C,  25,  122 

Meek,  The,  219 

Men  Become  Sons  of  God,  94, 

130 
Merciful,  The,  221 
Messianic     Consciousness     of 

Jesus,  The,  178 
Misapprehensions,  Correcting, 

189 
Model  Prayer,  The,  250 
Morality,  The  Pure,  257 
Mourn,  They  that,  219 
Murder,  The  Law  of,  75,  243 

Necessity    of    the    Death    of 

Jesus,  200 
Neuman,  Arno,  168 

Oath,  The  Law  of  the,  244 


Optimism  of  Jesus,  The,   125 
Oral  Gospel,  The,  37 


)ias,   41,  44 
Paul,  112,  122 

The  Influence  of,  25 
Peacemakers,  The,  222 
Perfect    Obedience    of    Jesus, 

The,  175 
Plummer,  Dr.  Alfred,  287 
Poor  in  Spirit,  The,  218 
Poor,  Jesus'  Care  for  the,  115 
Prayer,  249 

The  Model,  250 
Pre-existence   of   Jesus,   The, 

176 
Presence,  God's,  104 
Problem,  The,  30 
Pure  in  Heart,  The,  221 

Q  Source,  The,  36,  43,  210 

Ramsay,  Prof.  W.  M.,  46 
Ransom,  The  Death  of  Jesus 

a,  203 
Religion,  The  True,  247 
Repentance,  224 
Resurrection,  The,  294 
Retaliation,  The  Law  of,  68, 

81,  244 
Revelation,  The  Supreme,  20 
Righteousness,  The  True,  239 

Sabbath  Controversy,  The,  70, 

72 
Salmon,   Prof.  George,  46 
Schmiedel,  Prof.  P.  W.,   168, 

170 
Second  Coming,  The,  297 

an  Event,  302 

a  Process,  301 
Seeley,  Prof.,  128 
Sin,  God's  Attitude  Towards, 

"    98 
Social  Distinctions  in  God,  96 
Son  of  God,  The,  169 
Sons  of  God,  129 
Sources  of  Information,  Our, 

35 


INDEX 


Sources,  Other,  47 
Stalker,  Prof.  James,  63 
State,  Duties  to  the,  263 

Tendencies,  Priestly  and  Pro- 
phetic, 65 

Universal  Salvation,  127 


Weiss,  Prof.  Bernard,  107 

Prof.  Johannes,  156,  158 

Wendt,  Prof.  Hans  Heinrich, 
108 

Wrath  of  God,  The,  98 
Meaning  of,  102 

Wright,  Dr.  Arthur,  39 


DEVOTIONAL 


JOHN  HENRY  JOWETT 

My  Daily  Meditation  for  the  circling  Year 

l2mo,  cloth,  net  $1.25. 

A  series  of  choice,  tabloid  talks — a  spiritual  meditation 
for  every  day  in  the  year.  Dr.  Jowett  points  every  word  of 
these  brief  expositions  so  that  it  tells,  while  the  lessons  he 
seeks  to  convey  are  so  propounded  as  to  enter  the  under- 
standing of  his  readers  along  a  pathway  of  light.  The  whole 
volume  is  of  true  mintage,  bearing  the  impress  of  Dr.  Jowett's 
ripest  thought  and  fruitful  mind. 

S.  D.   GORDON 

Quiet  Talks  About  the  Crowned  Chri^ 

i2mo,  cloth,  net  75c. 

After  many  years'  study  of  the  one  book  of  the  Bible 
devoted  to  the  subject  of  the  crowned  Christ — the  Revelation 
of  John — Mr.  Gordon  has  put  these  latest  talks  together.  No 
book  of  the  sixty-six  has  seemed  so  much  like  a  riddle,  and 
set  so  many  guessing.  Mr.  Gordon,  however,  holds  the  deep 
conviction  that  it  is  wholly  a  practical  book,  and  concerned 
wholly  with  our  practical  daily  lives. 

F.  B.  MEYER,  B,A. 

My  Daily  Prayer 

A  Short  Supplication  for  Every  Day  in  the  Year. 
32mo,  leather,  net  35c;  cloth,  net  25c. 

"This  is  a  tiny  volume,  in  the  'Yet  Another  Day'  series, 
and  contains  a  brief  prayer  for  each  day  in  the  year.  Some 
of  the  petitions  contain  only  one  sentence,  but  each  one  is 
simple,  pertinent,  and  helpful." — Zion's  Herald. 

GEORGE  MATHESON 

Day  Unto  Day 

A  Brief  Prayer  for  Every  Day.  New  Edition. 
i6mo,  cloth,  net  50c. 

These  choice  prayers  will  be  valued  by  the  Christian 
world  for  the  stimulus,  inspiration,  and  wide  spiritual  out- 
look which  have  made  the  memory  of  their  author  a  cher- 
ished possession. 

HENRY  WARD  BE  EC  HER 

A  Book  of  Public  Prayer 

i2mo,  cloth,  net  7Sc. 

"A  distinct  addition  to  our  devotional  literature.  It  is  good 
for  private  reading;  but  would  be  especially  valuable  for 
ministers  as  an  aid  to  the  difficult,  but  immensely  important, 
service  of  voicing  the  petitions  of  a  congregation  in  public 
prayer." — Standard. 


ESSAYS  AND  STUDIES 


JOSEPH  FOR  T  NE  WTON  Author  of' The  Eternal 

■  Christ,      Davtd  Swing 

What  Have  the  Saints  to  Teach  Us? 

A  Message  from  the  Church  of  the  Past  to  the 
Church  of  To-day.     i2mo,  cloth,  net  See. 

"Of  that  profounder  life  of  faith  and  prayer  and  vision 
which  issues  in  deeds  of  daring  excellence,  the  Pilgrims  of 
the  Mystic  Way  are  the  leaders  and  guides;  and  there  is 
much  in  our  time  which  invites  their  leadership." — Preface, 

JOHN  BALCOM  SHAW,   P.P. 

The  Angel  in  the  Sun 

Glimpses  of  the  Light  Eternal.     Cloth,  net  $1.00. 

Dr.  Shaw  has  prepared  a  series  of  spirited  addresses 
marked  throughout  by  sincerity  and  fine  feeling,  and  free 
of  all  philosophical  surmise,  or  theological  cavil.  "The  Angel 
In  The  Sun"  is  a  refreshing  and  enheartening  book;  the 
cheery  word  of  a  man  of  unswerving  faith  to  his  compan- 
ions by  the  way. 

PHILIP    MAURO 

Looking  for  the  Saviour 

i2mo,  cloth,  net  35c.;    paper,  20c. 

The  first  part  of  this  little  volume  is  devoted  to  an  exami- 
nation of  the  chief  reasons  that  have  been  advanced  in  sup- 
?ort  of  the  post-tribulation  view  of  the  Rapture  of  the  Saints, 
"he  second  part  contains  some  affirmative  teaching  relating 
to  the  general  subject  of  the  Lord's  return. 

PROF.  LEE  R.  SCARBOROUGH 

Recruits  for  World  Conquers 

i2mo,  cloth,  net  75c. 

"Here  is  a  soul-stirring  message,  presenting  the  call  and  the 
need  and  the  response  we  should  make.  Tlie  author  is  deeply 
spiritual,  wise,  earnest  and  conservative  in  presenting  his  ap- 
peal.— Word  and  Way. 

PRINCIPAL  ALEXANPER   WHYTE,  P.  P. 

Thirteen  Appreciations 

i2mo,  cloth,  net  $1.50. 

Appreciations  of  Santa  Teresa,  Jacob  Boehme,  Bishop  An- 
drews, Samuel  Rutherford,  Thomas  Shepard,  Thomas  Good- 
win, Sir  Thomas  Browne,  William  Law,  James  Fraser  of 
Brea,  Bishop  Butler,  Cardinal  Newman,  William  Guthrie  and 
John  Wesley,  go  to  the  making  of  Dr.  Whyte's  new  book,  a 
work  of  high  authority,  revealing  on  every  page  the  man  who 
wrote  it. 


PRACTICAL  RELIGION-CHURCH  HISTORY 

HAROLD    BEGBIE  Author  of ''  Twice- Born  Men' ' 

The  Proof  of  God 

A  Dialogue  With  Two  Letters.    i2mo,  cloth,  net  75c, 

The  author  of  "Twice-Born  Men"  here  enters  a  new  field 
of  thought.  It  is  a  most  effective  book — one  that  will  be 
read  and  passed  on  to  others.  His  method  of  meeting  the 
agnostic  and  the  skeptic  is  admirable.  Here  is  philosophy 
presented  in  conversational  form,  pointed  and  convincing. 

friLLIAM  J.  LHAMON,   D.D.  Dean  of  Bible  School,  Drury 
-^————————^—^^—~      College,  Springfield,  Mo. 

The  Character  Christ— Fact  or  Fiction? 

i2mo,  cloth,  net  $1.00. 

A  study  of  the  Christian  Gospels,  prepared  and  presented 
with  a  view  to  enforcing  the  claims  of  the  historical  Christ. 
Attention  is  directed  to  the  literary  presentation  of  the  char- 
acter Christ. 

C.    L.    DRAWBRIDGE 

Common  Objections  to  Christianity 

Library  of  Historic  Theology.    8vo,  cloth,  net  $1.50. 

An  ably  compiled  volume  dealing  with  almost  every  cur- 
rent objection  to  Christianity.  The  author  writes  with  a 
pretty  full  knowledge  of  these  objections,  having,  as  Secre- 
tary of  the  Christian  Evidence  Society,  lectured  in  the  Lon- 
don Parks  and  held  his  own  against  all  sorts  of  questioners. 

CHARLES  J.    SHEBBEARE  Rector  of  Swerford, 

••^-^——^-^——^————^—^—  Oxon,  England 

Religion  in  an  Age  of  Doubt 

Library  of  Historic  Theology.    8vo,  cloth,  net  $1.50. 

To  this  great  problem  Mr.  Shebbeare  addresses  himself, 
claiming  that  with  the  old  faith  and  the  added  insight  of  a 
new  teaching,  believers  may  lay  the  foundations  of  a  devo- 
tional system,  which  furnishes  a  rational  ground  for  a  robust 
faith. 

fF.  J.   SPARROW  SIMPSON,   D.D. 

The  Catholic  Conception  of  the  Church 

Library  of  Historic  Theology.     8vo,  cloth,  net  $1.50. 

Dr.  Simpson's  book  supplies  the  information  and  assists  in 
ftJtming  a  right  judgment:  What  Christ  taught  and  did; 
what  bt.  Paul  and  the  Early  Fathers  conceived  to  be  the 
functions  of  the  Church;  the  idea  of  the  Church  in  the  Couu 
cil   of   Trent,    are    among  the    matters    ably    discussed. 

JOHN  B.  RUST,  D.D. 

Modernism  and  the  Reformation 

i2mo,  cloth,  net  $1.50. 

Ilie  aim  of  this  able  treatise  is  to  defend  the  Protestant 
Reformed  faith,  as  against  the  liberalizing  movement  within 
the  Roman  Church  known  as  Modernism.  The  essential 
principles  of  Protestanism  are  set  forth  in  detail  with  an 
exhaustive  review  of  the  trend  and  methods  of  Modernism. 


EARLIER  WORKS  IN  DEMAND 

WAYNE  WHIPPLE 

The  Story-Life  of  the  Son  of  Man 

8vo,  illustrated,  net  $2.50. 

"A  literary  mosaic,  consisting  of  quotations  from  a  great 
number  of  writers  concerning  all  the  events  of  the  Gospels. 
The  sub-title  accurately  describes  its  contents.  That  sub- 
title is  'Nearly  a  thousand  stories  from  sacred  and  secular 
sources  in  a  continuous  and  complete  chronicle  of  the  earth 
life  of  the  Saviour.'  The  book  was  prepared  for  the  general 
reader,  but  will  be  valuable  to  minister,  teacher  and  student. 
There  are  many  full-page  engravings  from  historic  paintings 
and  sacred  originals,  some  reproduced  for  the  first  time." — 
Christian  Observer. 

GAIUS  GLENN  ATKINS,  P.P. 

Pilgrims  of  the  Lonely  Road 

i2mo,  cloth,  net  $1.50. 

"A  rare  book  for  its  style,  its  theme  and  the  richness  of 
its  insight.  Seldom  is  seen  a  book  of  more  exquisite  grace 
of  diction — happy  surprises  of  phrase,  and  lovely  lengths  of 
haunting  prose  to  delight  the  eye.  Each  of  the  great  pil- 
grim's studies  is  followed  step  by  step  along  the  lonely  way 
of  the  soul  in  its  quest  of  light,  toward  the  common  goal  of 
all — union  with  the  eternal." — Chicago  Record-Herald. 

S.  P.  GORDON 

Quiet  Talks  on  Following  The  Chri^ 

l2mo,  cloth,  net  75c. 

"This  volume  is  well  calculated  to  aid  in  Christian  life,  to 
give  strength,  courage  and  light  on  diificult  problems.  It 
grips  one's  very  life,  brings  one  face  to  face  with  God's 
word,  ways  of  understanding  it  and,  even  its  every  day  ap- 
plication. It  is  plain,  clear,  direct,  no  confusion  of  dark 
sentences." — Bapt.  Observer. 

G.  CAMPBELL  MORGAN,  P.P. 

The  Teaching  of  Chri^ 

A  Companion  Volume  to  "The  Crises  of  The 
Christ."    8vo,  cloth,  net  $1.50. 

"One  does  not  read  far  before  he  is  amazed  at  the  clear  and 
logical  grasp  Dr.  Morgan  has  upon  divine  truths.  Could  a 
copy  of  this  book,  with  its  marvelous  insight,  its  straightfor- 
wardness, its  masterly  appeal,  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  our 
church  leaders,  it  would  go  far  toward  negativing  the  spir- 
itual barrenness  of  destructive  criticism.  Here  is  a  work 
that  may  profitably  occupy  a  prominent  place  in  the  minister's 
library." — Augsburg  Teacher. 

ZEPHINE  HUMPHREY 

The  Edge  of  the  Woods    And  other  Papers 
i2mo,  cloth,  net  $1.25. 

"Sane  optimism,  an  appreciation  of  the  beautiful  and  a 
delicate  humor  pervades  the  book  which  is  one  for  lovers  of 
real  literature  to  enjoy." — Pittsburgh  Post. 


Princeton 


Theoloqical  Seminary  Libraries 


1012   01193   8893 


